#they failed heterosexuality again

[fake-married-my-dead-fiance]

The girls walk off together arm in arm, the guys stand so close together, the general blocking shows two couples. And then Pei is like, "Don't thank me for looking after Wen I didn't do it for you."

Gotta love just having the core members of the ploycule together in this episode.

[geofractal]

[theinfinitedivides]

note to self do not try and watch BTS clips from SRK films at ungodly hours of the morning, your gay ass will regret it one way or another

[taliabhattwrites]

Transmisogyny is not about being a 'masculine woman'.

Hint #1: A lot of trans women, such as myself, are not particularly masculine. Some of us are, and I know several trans butches, but the majority of us perform femininity, often because we are punished and gatekept from care if we are not perceived as performing our "chosen" gender adequately.

Rather, transmisogyny is about--as May Peterson so excellently put it--rejecting the imperative to inhabit, embody, and perform manhood.

Read that again--transmisogyny is the specific corrective, policing mechanism directed at those of us who refuse to be coerced into the patriarchal notion of the "male sex", a refusal that is punished by specific manifestations of degendering, monstering, sexualization, hyperscrutiny, fetishization, and violence. We are treated as a combination of failed, neutered man and barren woman, marginalized on the basis of choosing to shape our sex and don the banner of womanhood while being unable to further patrilineality in a society absolutely fixated on and organized around the heterosexual, reproductive mandate.

The mechanisms underlying transmisogyny crop up in many places because the root of societal transmisogyny is societal misogyny and the over-arching structuring of our entire civilization into a regime of heterosexuality. That is not the same thing as everyone being subject to transmisogyny.

Because, to be blunt, at the end of the day, when the chips are down, we all know who's treated like a troon and who isn't. Those of us who cannot be absolved of the original sin of being branded with the male sex keenly understand it to be the source of our disposability.

[jayrockin]

while i was reading the updated lore i got the idea for an atypical clan structure. how would a clan of centaur asexuals work?

i would imagine it would be a gaggle of individuals who are either uninterested or turned off from the idea of matriarch/entourage drama, gender nonconfirming individuals, and others who have little interest in siring young. since so much of centaur culture is centered around reproductive exclusivity, an entire clan that just- *doesn’t* want to have kids would be weird. im sure to most centaurs it would seem like a clan that’s missing a matriarch and her spouses, just entirely made up of workers.

Could certainly happen. Would make a potentially stable anarchist clan, but would have to recruit enough members over time to make up for the eventual deaths of older members, or split/merge with other similar clans. The same is true of a lot of same-sex clans, who generally also don't want kids.

I could... see anarchist political celibacy ideas (avoiding sex because it's seen as the element of chaos that makes anarchist clans fail) mixing with innately asexual individuals in messy ways, as well. I don't think discussion of asexuality among centaurs is neatly divided between preference and ideology, it certainly isn't for homosexuality or transexuality. They don't have the same history of medicalization or individualist identity politics that human sex and gender does. Sexuality either serves and protects the traditional clan hierarchy, or it doesn't. This is why heterosexual behavior is more heavily policed by most centaur cultures, because it only serves the clan structure if it occurs between a matriarch and their mates.

I think many asexual centaurs would strongly identify with their position as workers (who in most cultures are discouraged or forbidden from sex) and fit well into most conventional clan structures, though may be considered kind of uptight about The Rules or holier-than-thou by workers who are sexually involved (whether or not they actually have this attitude.) Some worker males might find themselves in trouble if they are young and pretty and their matriarch wants to marry them to an entourage for the political benefits (and to get a prettyboy out of the worker pool were they may be too popular with worker females) (again, regardless of their actual interests). Worker females might find themselves in trouble if they are the current matriarch's favorite pick for next in line. This is where asexual behavior would clash with the enforcement of traditional clan structure and break the bounds of acceptability.

[inkskinned]

you're grabbing lunch with a nice man and he gives you that strange grimace-smile that's popular right now; an almost sardonic "twist" of his mouth while he looks literally down on you. it looks like he practiced the move as he leans back, arms folded. he just finished reciting the details of NFTs to you and explaining Oppenheimer even though he only watched a youtube about it and hasn't actually seen it. you are at the bottom of your wine glass.

you ask the man across from you if he has siblings, desperately looking for a topic. literally anything else.

he says i don't like small talk. and then he smiles again, watching you.

a few years ago, you probably would have said you're above celebrity gossip, but honestly, you've been kind of enjoying the dumb shit of it these days. with the rest of the earth burning, there's something familiar and banal about dragging ariana grande through the mud. you think about jeanette mccurdy, who has often times gently warned the world she's not as nice as she appears. you liked i'm glad my mom died but it made you cry a lot.

he doesn't like small talk, figure out something to say.

you want to talk about responsibility, and how ariana grande is only like 6 days older than you are - which means she just turned 30 and still dresses and acts like a 13 year old, but like sexy. there's something in there about the whole thing - about insecurity, and never growing up, and being sexualized from a young age.

people have been saying that gay people are groomers. like, that's something that's come back into the public. you have even said yourself that it's just ... easier to date men sometimes. you would identify as whatever the opposite of "heteroflexible" is, but here you are again, across from a man. you like every woman, and 3 people on tv. and not this guy. but you're trying. your mother is worried about you. she thinks it's not okay you're single. and honestly this guy was better before you met, back when you were just texting.

wait, shit. are you doing the same thing as ariana grande? are you looking for male validation in order to appease some internalized promise of heteronormativity? do you conform to the idea that your happiness must result in heterosexuality? do you believe that you can resolve your internal loneliness by being accepted into the patriarchy? is there a reason dating men is easier? why are you so scared of fucking it up with women? why don't you reach out to more of them? you have a good sense of humor and a big ol' brain, you could have done a better job at online dating.

also. jesus christ. why can't you just get a drink with somebody without your internal feminism meter pinging. although - in your favor (and judgement aside) in the case of your ariana grande deposition: you have been in enough therapy you probably wouldn't date anyone who had just broken up with their wife of many years (and who has a young child). you'd be like - maybe take some personal time before you begin this journey. like, grande has been on broadway, you'd think she would have heard of the plot of hamlet.

he leans forward and taps two fingers to the table. "i'm not, like an andrew tate guy," he's saying, "but i do think partnership is about two people knowing their place. i like order."

you knew it was going to be hard. being non-straight in any particular way is like, always hard. these days you kind of like answering the question what's your sexuality? with a shrug and a smile - it's fine - is your most common response. like they asked you how your life is going and not to reveal your identity. you like not being straight. you like kissing girls. some days you know you're into men, and sometimes you're sitting across from a man, and you're thinking about the power of compulsory heterosexuality. are you into men, or are you just into the safety that comes from being seen with them? after all, everyone knows you're failing in life unless you have a husband. it almost feels like a gradebook - people see "straight married" as being "all A's", and anything else even vaguely noncompliant as being ... like you dropped out of the school system. you cannot just ignore years of that kind of conditioning, of course you like attention from men.

"so let's talk boundaries." he orders more wine for you, gesturing with one hand like he's rousing an orchestra. sir, this is a fucking chain restaurant. "I am not gonna date someone who still has male friends. also, i don't care about your little friends, i care about me. whatever stupid girls night things - those are lower priority. if i want you there, you're there."

he wasn't like this over text, right? you wouldn't have been even in the building if he was like this. you squint at him. in another version of yourself, you'd be running. you'd just get up and go. that's what happens on the internet - people get annoyed, and they just leave. you are locked in place, almost frozen. you need to go to the bathroom and text someone to call you so you have an excuse, like it's rude to just-leave. like he already kind of owns you. rudeness implies a power paradigm, though. see, even your social anxiety allows the patriarchy to get to you.

you take a sip of the new glass of wine. maybe this will be a funny story. maybe you can write about it on your blog. maybe you can meet ariana grande and ask her if she just maybe needs to take some time to sit and think about her happiness and how she measures her own success.

is this settling down? is this all that's left in your dating pool? just accepting that someone will eventually love you, and you have to stop being picky about who "makes" you a wife?

you look down to your hand, clutching the knife.

[garykingz]

girl I like your take (“Charles has a crush on Max but it’s completely different to Max having crush on Charles). Explore pls!!!!

Omg, nonnie, I could go ON about how different yet the same these two are with each other. Body language is absolutely everything with Max and Charles, though I'm sure everyone knows this. Max's yapping isn't everything.

Honestly, I genuinely believe with my heart of hearts that Max has an actual crush on Charles, there is, and it sounds like a joke but I'm being serious, no heterosexual reason for him to act the way he does around him. (This is coming from an aromantic, so it's not like I'm seeing something that's not there.)

I've made a post before about how I think some of these guys are not straight but bc of how F1 is built on dodgy sponsors(BIG MONEY) and can't forget the corrupt FIA, they can't just say it. That's a whole other can of worms I won't get into rn tho.

Anyway – the way I see is that Charles absolutely, without an ounce of doubt, knows Max has a crush on him. Like the OP mentioned in their post, how Charles' Christmas gift to Max was the F1 game with all of Charles' face on it, with the tag "for my biggest fan." Yeah, he knows. And he encourages it.

And not to say Charles doesn't crush as hard on Max as Max does on him, Charles absolutely does. He just tries to be nonchalant about it. But his giggles fail him every time Max opens his mouth.

I think the joint Vegas interview is a good example of this. Charles tries to be serious with Max but Max is clearly doing his damnest to make Charles laugh, which obviously, Charles does. Once again, the way Charles looks at Max in this, he knows Max is trying to make him laugh too. (Max also literally quoted Charles' joke from an interview that he wasn't even in, meaning Max WATCHED it in his own time.)

THIS ONE REALLY GETS ME, MAN. Max and Charles look at each other, Max lingers longer on him and Charles ???? Starts touching himself ???? Like he still thinks Max is looking at him??????? Max looks off to a screen that's on them AND LOOKS AT CHARLES AGAIN BC HES ACTING THAT WAY?? WEIRDOS.

Charles wants to be nonchalant and chill so bad but he's not slick. He's just as down bad as Max is and thinks we don't see it.

(GIFs belong to @pretzelgotze)

Or when Charles stopped mid interview to go speak with Max.

Or Charles, not getting podium at all, yet running for his life, leaving his radio on for Xavi to still ask if he's there, the car empty, because he wanted to be the first one to congratulate Max on his WDC in Qatar last year.

Or Charles ditching his little jeep for him and him alone to go and sit with Max, even though the car is NOT made for two people, he sits in it anyway and they both get driven away as they wave at the cameras. It's giving just married.

This is long as hell now, apologies, told ya I'd ramble LMAO

Anyway, conclusion: Charles tries to hide the fact that he has a crush on Max but his body language and giggling fails him every single time.

Extra conclusion: not to be taken TOO seriously but they are in fact my ken dolls that I make kiss

[theuniverseisscreaming]

Eddie as an Unreliable Narrator

I want to expand a little on something I talked about over on twitter, which is the concept of Eddie as an unreliable narrator and how this has kept him from confronting his sexuality.

Before the inevitable “Eddie said he was heterosexual, he’s a straight man,” in the comments, I’ll just say that we already know gay Eddie has been a consideration from LFJR confirming it was originally going to be Tommy and Eddie together, never mind all the queer coding to date in Eddie’s general storyline. If you choose to take Eddie’s words at face value, that’s fine, you do you! This post will get into why I don’t. 

Eddie tells Father Brian that he doesn’t believe that he deserves to be forgiven, so when he sees him again, he recognizes Eddie’s decision to pick the healthier, less fun beverage for what it is: Eddie depriving himself of one of the small joys there are to be found in life. He confronts him on this, asking why he changed his mind, and Eddie looks genuinely perplexed. “…decided I wanted water?” 

“See, I think that you were punishing yourself. I think that you were denying yourself because you don’t feel worthy right now.” You can tell that Eddie thinks this is a crock of shit and that the priest doesn’t understand him at all - right up until he says Eddie doesn’t feel worthy of joy. 

Eddie tries to deflect by saying he doesn’t have a lot to feel joyful about, and in doing so he is denying the accusation by saying it’s not about what he feels he’s worthy of. There just isn’t a lot of joy in his life to be had right now. The priest challenges this perspective by putting a positive spin on all of the negative things Eddie lists, and in doing so, removes the excuse Eddie is using to avoid confronting that this is about him punishing himself. That he has been punishing himself, and it’s not clear yet how far back this behaviour actually goes. 

Because here’s the thing: Eddie thinks the water is just water. He doesn’t understand the subconscious compulsion behind it, because this is something he has been doing for so long it no longer feels abnormal. At some point, he started depriving himself of enjoying the little things in life as a way of punishing himself whenever he felt like he wasn’t living up to expectations, whenever he thought he was failing someone. The question is, when did it start, and what was the first thing he felt he deserved punishment for? 

When Father Brian identifies the mustache as a disguise he asks Eddie what he thinks he’ll see when he looks in the mirror without it, and Eddie says he thinks he’ll see a failure, a man who doesn’t deserve the joy he’s been depriving himself of. In a way, he is trying to become someone else to avoid confronting the person that he actually is, and the reason he feels he’s failed. 

This isn’t really something new: Shannon dies, and Eddie joins an illegal fight club where physical pain becomes an outlet for the anger and frustration he’s feeling. Chris is afraid of losing another parent, so Eddie deprives himself of the job that gives his life meaning outside of being Christopher’s dad rather than trying to find another solution. None of this is even taking into account the relationships he forces himself into because he feels he needs to find a replacement mother for Chris, and how forcing himself into that box he so clearly does not want for himself is just another way of depriving himself of joy. 

Father Brian tells Eddie that God has already forgiven him for his mistakes, but here’s the thing: Eddie doesn’t give a shit about God’s forgiveness, not really. The forgiveness Eddie is trying to earn isn’t even just Christopher’s - it’s his own, too. And he doesn’t know how to do that, because he doesn’t know how to love himself. The only part of himself he’s ever tried to love - being a father - has been irreparably damaged in his eyes. So how does he come back from that? How does he get back to a point where he feels deserving of being Christopher’s dad again? 

What’s interesting to me is that I do believe Christopher is the one bit of joy Eddie’s allowed himself up until now. His birth is the only time during Eddie’s entire marriage with Shannon that we see him actually happy, and this is one of the first examples of Eddie being an unreliable narrator that we have in the show because he acts like this wasn’t the case. 

Yet he was visibly unhappy for every part of his marriage we were shown, and by his own admission joining the army was just as much about running from it as it was about providing for his own family. He is unable to define what Shannon means to him, and he says he loved being married to her rather than saying he loved her. But in Shannon’s death, Eddie has romanticized her image so much that when Kim asks if she was the love of his life, he says he thinks she was. 

If Chris represents one of the sole joys Eddie has allowed himself in life, then Shannon is the reason he has received it, and the guilt he feels for letting her down - for not loving her the way he should, for not being able to be there for her, for not being able to save her despite that being his job - is so immense he can’t possibly imagine atoning for it. And to understand his guilt, we have to confront the reason he wasn’t able to be the husband he felt she deserved. 

See, we could maybe argue that Eddie didn’t initially try to reconcile with Shannon while she was alive because he felt guilty for pushing her away, except when he has a moment to get back together, he chokes. He can’t answer her when she asks what she means to him, and the fact that she even has to ask tells the audience that she isn’t sure of his feelings, even though they’ve been actively sleeping together again and spending time together as a family. He is only able to make an offer of commitment when she thinks she is pregnant again, a repeat of how they got married in the first place, and I think that’s what ultimately answers her question. She is the mother of his child, not the love of his life, but to Eddie, Chris is the real love and joy of his life, so the two kind of feel like the same thing. 

We have seen in Bobby’s storyline a widow with a tremendous amount of guilt move on and find his happily ever after. Bobby actually plays a role in the death of his wife and children, and he grapples with his guilt and suicidal tendencies because of it, but he is still able to heal as much as one can from such a trauma and fall in love with Athena. 

In contrast, Eddie shows no interest in finding another relationship until he is prompted by others. When he does try to date, he has to fake his way through two separate relationships where he just couldn’t love them the way he thought he should. He tried to - he wanted to. It would have been easier for him, and for Chris, if he could have. 

There’s nothing objectively wrong with either of the women, he seems to enjoy their company and he finds them to be pretty, but it just isn’t enough. On top of that, he admits dating has always felt like a performance, which you can especially see in his relationship with Ana where he just doesn’t seem entirely like himself. He’s the image of the man he thinks she wants him to be, because he doesn’t want another repeat of his relationship with Shannon where he always fell short of what she wanted and needed. He’s the “perfect boyfriend,” except for the part where he doesn’t feel the same about her at all. 

Marisol is a little different. While her development is limited, she’s got a more laid-back personality that is closer to Eddie’s own, and arguably she should be a good fit. Marisol feels a bit like what Eddie’s idealized relationship with Shannon was like, and that’s what makes it so very interesting when Eddie blows it all up by going out with Shannon’s doppelganger. Their relationship is an emotional affair, and Eddie admits it isn’t sex that he wants with her which is interesting because we know he and Marisol are no longer being intimate. The truth is, he doesn’t know what it is he wants from Kim, or frankly Marisol - just like he didn’t know with Shannon. 

Unfortunately, before figuring it out he pays for his sin of lying to everyone - to Chris, to Buck, and to Marisol - by getting caught in the worst possible way and traumatizing Chris in the process. We know this is how he feels from his actual confession to Father Brian, and I think to him it is the worst of all the sins he feels he’s committed because the only way he has been able to make up for everything else up until now is by being the best parent he possibly can. In a way, he has been trying to heal his own childhood trauma by breaking the cycle of toxic parenting, and giving Chris the life he never got to have.

So to Eddie, traumatizing Chris is his greatest failure, and he doesn’t know how to recover from it because he still doesn’t understand why he got involved with Kim in the first place. It’s not just that he missed Shannon, or he would be able to explain that. It goes back to what Eddie says to Kim moments before Chris walks in - that he feels broken, and like he can’t fix it. This feeling is only compounded by the fear that he has ruined his relationship with his son forever. 

The conversation with Father Brian tells us that Eddie is hiding from himself and that he is denying himself of his desires as some kind of penance. The priest recognizes this and he recognizes that Eddie doesn’t want the cop-out of being forgiven on behalf of God. He is someone who needs to feel they have actually earned it, and that’s okay - just as long as he remembers that in order to take care of others, he has to take care of himself, too. More than that, he’s directed to do something fun just for himself, and those Catholic rituals that are still part of him even if he doesn’t believe in them take over and allow him to do just that. 

There’s something really beautiful about the same institution that led to Eddie and Shannon getting married too young being what kick-starts his journey of self discovery. It was never about rediscovering religion - he was never religious to begin with. It was always about going back to that old wound and finally healing from everything that followed. It was about reclaiming the childhood he lost from growing up too fast. But mostly, it was about being told he is allowed to focus on his needs sometimes, too. 

[midnightsvinyls]

why i prefer jegulus to jily

1. this is probably my main reason— lily isn’t the kind of person to publicly dislike someone for years and then one day just go huh. he’s not as bad as i thought? omg let’s get married! it just seemed kinda forced—like some of jkr’s other heterosexual relationships *cough* remadora and hinny *cough*

2. also (it’s not a canon event but most of the fandom has accepted it as canon) james repeatedly asking lily out doesn’t sit right with me. he’d respect her when she said no and wouldn’t constantly pester her. he’s not that kinda person (in fanon anyways)

2. jeggy’s dynamics? hello? rivals/ enemies to lovers, best friend’s brother, grumpy x sunshine, thinks he’s unlovable vs loves everyone— i could go on and on

3. jegulus’s ANGST. its never fails to rip my soul out, tear it to shreds, set it on fire then put it back into my chest and do it all over again. i’m not saying jily isn’t also heartbreaking— it 100% is. but jegulus is just UGH.

4. also there’s so much comedic potential with jegulus. sirius’s reaction? gets me every time. tie swapping? hell yes. slytherin vs gryffindor quidditch matches but they’re just checking each other out? GIVE IT TO ME

5. platonic jily is one of the best friendships in the fandom imo. they’d be that duo that had like a month-long relationship but are now just friends and get super embarrassed whenever it’s brought up. especially because i hc lily as a lesbian and that’s just the cherry on top

i am by no means hating on jily— all ships are valid. it’s just my opinion so please. no hate

[fake-married-my-dead-fiance]

The boys are doing a gay little sword dance while the girls hug and get drunk? This is the least heterosexual drama I've ever watched

[griefabyss69]

Flashpoint

Written for @steddiemicrofic! And dedicated to @swifterthings. Happy birthday Meg!!! <3 <3 <3

[ AO3 ] 'GUARD' wc: 532 | rated: E | cw: Public sex, humiliation

Steve is a sexual thrill seeker, Eddie gets off on humiliation, and they're deeply in love—a tale as old as time!

By now, Eddie thinks he should be used to the risky shit they do whenever Steve gets adventurous. Sure, maybe a handful of strangers have caught them, but nothing bad has happened; usually they just laugh or duck their head and walk faster.

Still, it's like Steve's either gotten too confident or he's looking for a bigger thrill, because today he's got Eddie bent over the hood of his car in the parking lot of the grocery store.

It's nighttime, but cars are still going by on the road and if someone turns into the lot they'll see Eddie lit up on both sides by the headlights of the Beemer.

Eddie's knees are like jello and he can't tell if it's from the humiliation, the fear of getting caught, or the insane shit Steve's doing to him, with his long fingers stroking the inside of his ass. All he can do is flatten his hands against the hood and rest his cheek on it, giving into whatever Steve decides they're doing tonight. He's pretty sure he's drooling on the metal.

His mind is just starting to slip out of hard reality and into something a little more comfortable when a car does pull into the parking lot. Steve buries his fingers as deep as they'll go and stops, leaning over him to cover him with his body.

"Hide your face," he murmurs in his ear.

"Car trouble?" a man's voice calls from where he's pulled up.

"We're okay," Steve calls back, and Eddie gives a thumbs up, hoping the nail polish will help sell their heterosexuality.

"Pretty crazy to be doing that here," the guy laughs. "But have your fun."

"We will, thanks," Steve replies, wiggling his fingers inside of Eddie, forcing a helpless shudder out of him.

The man drives off and Steve pulls back, no longer hiding him, and once again Eddie's exposed to the world. He looks back, seeing the exhilaration in Steve's face, and understands.

Steve wants to humiliate him and save him. He wants to show him off and be his body guard at the same time.

"You fucking loved that," he accuses.

"Yeah," Steve sighs, happy. "You're lucky I covered you."

Eddie images Steve openly fucking him like this in front of the stranger and shivers, feeling his dick jerk where it hangs between his thighs.

"You love me too much to do that," he says, not sure if Steve's gonna take it as a challenge or not.

"That's not it," Steve says, using his free hand to get his jeans undone and pull his dick out. "I love you too much not to share you."

Eddie groans into the puddle of drool he left on the hood. The haze from before starts to overtake him again as Steve pulls his fingers out. He hears a cap, then there's cold lube sliding from his ass crack down to his balls, making him shudder and widen his stance.

When Steve pushes his dick into him it goes easily, but it's still a big hot thing taking its claim, connecting them in a way that never fails to make Eddie's spine melt.

"I love you too," he moans.

[curlybinghe]

summarizing the binghe swap from either binghe's POV is so fucking funny

like, for bing-mei: you wake up next to some random lady, very pointedly not your shizun, and are immediately on edge because you do not swing that way and also you just recently got him back and would really appreciate if he would stop disappearing!!! you leave the rooms and this random lady in not-your bed only to find there are SIX FUCKING HUNDRED other random ladies in not-your house who seem to think they are married to you.

also, one of them is ning-shijie? which. ew? that's basically your sister. you decide that your brief foray into heterosexuality has been a very harrowing experience indeed and binghe would like to see his master please.

and for bing-ge: you get beat up and run into OH MY GOD THIS ASSHOLE AGAIN. you could have sworn you offed this dude. you are very sure, actually, that you offed this dude. but here he is, in possession of arms, and fussing over you like. like idk someone who cares or something. he aggressively gives you first aid, pills you like a fucking dog, reprimands you like a child and gives you a lil smooch all within the span of 15 minutes and you will need four to five business days to process this. wait, no you don't actually, you are a strong high value man and have six hundred wives who you are attracted to. shut the fuck up. you do not need or even want this new shen qingqiu a little. not at all. hes a beta male anyway. he probably has pronouns.

like we can all agree shen yuan's perspective was already pretty funny save the accidentally almost-fucking this guy who ripped your arm off last you saw him and hey! maybe that aggressive first aid also isn't something you would have done if you knew which binghe you were doing it to. but jesus thinking about the binghes' confused little racecar brains going 400mph on two very different roads never fails to make me cackle

[gatheringbones]

[“As history has shown, and as I was at the time experiencing, a strap-on can be sexy, but it can also be a failure and a threat. It draws attention to how contradictory and fragile our definitions of male and female are, and how tightly we cling to them, even in relationships between women, where gender and sexuality are more flexible.

I think it’s important to look at how this played out, not just in the history of straight men policing lesbians but in the lesbian community policing itself. In the 1940s and 50s a bar scene began to develop in cities across the country, marking the first time when lesbians, particularly working-class ones, gathered publicly and in large numbers. During this time a butch/femme culture developed that included strict codes of dress and behavior both in and outside the bedroom. Butch women slicked back their hair, wore suits and jeans, and were, generally, the “givers” of sexual pleasure. Femme women wore dresses and makeup and were the “receivers” of sexual pleasure. In some ways, this culture was liberating, as it represented a powerful, cohesive group aesthetic and safety in numbers. Especially for women who actually identified as butch, it was also a chance to finally adopt masculine dress without being seen as failed or dangerous but rather as sexy and loveable. For others this culture was a trap, pushing women into restrictive sex and gender roles in the same ways heterosexuality had. It is by no means the only lesbian aesthetic, but I think part of the reason it has stuck around for so long in the popular imagination as the way lesbians are is because it allows straight people to again see themselves as the center of the sexual world.

In either case, strap-ons were not widely used, or at least not talked about. In Boots of Leather, Slippers of Gold, a book that documents the lives of Black and white lesbians in Buffalo, there is a pretty exhaustive set of interviews about sex acts and terminology, but no one mentions owning, liking, or even trying sex with a strap-on. Indeed, the one mention of a dildo is one of bewilderment as Vic, a self-identified butch, talks about her friend pulling her into the bathroom to show her the new strap-on she got. “Jesus, she whipped this thing out . . . I’m supposed to be butch and my face felt like a neon sign. I could feel the embarrassment. How do you admire a dildo? No seriously, what do you say?”

Butches in the book took great pride “in their own hands and their ability to please,” which “did not dispose them to think that a dildo would improve their lovemaking.” It’s interesting that they considered the dildo less potent and successful than hands. This could be read as displacing the power of the dick, but, coupled with the silence surrounding strap-on use, it also points to a greater fear about the lesbian body. How regulated and small it had to be to exist. How easily it could be diminished by something outside itself, or destroyed altogether.

In the lesbian radical feminist movement of the 1960s and 70s, there was also a great deal of attention focused on creating distance from dicks. Jill Johnston argued in A Lesbian Nation that the only true road to female liberation was the conscious “withdrawal at every level from the man to develop woman supremacy.” This meant that not only butch/femme dynamics but also penetrative sex were out. Anne Koedt developed the theory that the vaginal orgasm was a myth perpetrated by Freud in order to center male sexual desire for penetration, though her evidence for this was a study done by Kinsey—a man—that found the vagina was not particularly sensitive to touch. True orgasms, Koedt argued, only came from the clitoris—even though she interestingly also called the clit “the female equivalent of the penis”—so if women wanted to have enjoyable sex there was no need for penetration, only clitoral stimulation. Andrea Dworkin went so far as to call the penis “a hidden symbol of terror” and argued that “violence is male, the male is the penis.”

Dorothy Allison writes about the effects this had on herself and other lesbians at the time. “No one admitted to using dildos, wanting to be tied up, wanting to be penetrated, or talking dirty—all that male stuff . . . my lover wanted us to perform tribadism, stare into each other’s eyes, and orgasm simultaneously. Egalitarian, female, feminist, revolutionary.” In attempting to free themselves from the penis, in many ways radical lesbians ended up reinscribing the power of the dick and sacrificing the range of sexual pleasure they could experience in the process.

In a counter to this, the lesbian sexual outlaws of the 1970s, 80s, and 90s argued that dildos were actually great, not problematic, but primarily because they didn’t reference the penis at all. Some even argued that wearing a dildo turns a woman into a cyborg, not woman, man, or even human, just a body involved in the mechanistic movements of giving and receiving pleasure. While there is something freeing about this argument, as it gets us out from under the idea that we can’t talk about strap-ons and that a woman wearing a strap-on is only trying to make up for a never-ending lack, it still bypasses the sticky, complicated reality of the gendered/human world we live in and the simple fact that sometimes lesbians want strap-ons to look like penises.

All of this begs the question: can a dyke wear a dick and just have some damn fun?”]

amy gall, from my dick, your dick, our dick, from wanting: women writing about desire, 2023

[easays]

To Ragh; or, On Fatness

Hi! Below is an actual play mini-essay. These are written as part of a personal writing practice of thinking critically about actual play. I hope you find this reading engaging and know that all I write reflects my own interpretations rather than as an official representation/canonization of these shows. Keep reading for my interpretation of Ragh Barkrock's fatness as part of queer representation in Dimension20.

Ragh Barkrock may be one of the most beloved NPCs in Dimension20. It would be easy for Ragh, a bloodrush player good enough to potentially play professionally, to be presented as hypermasculine. In fact, the freshmen year art for Ragh, when he was antagonist rather than beloved ally, showed him in a muscular, inverted Dorito shaped body typical of a jock.

He's, obviously, built, and his cut jaw and cheekbones only bolster that image. As Ragh comes to terms with being gay at the end of Fantasy High, his countenance changes. When we see him again, the new art reflects a chubbier, happier Ragh.

The show aligning weight gain with acceptance and happiness already works against prevailing stereotypes that use weight loss as a quick metaphor for improving yourself and being the "real you." Moreover, connecting Ragh's acceptance of his sexuality with what seems like a larger comfort in his own body is a strong indictment of hypermasculine gay culture. As Gabriel Arana writes, gay men "must reconcile their sense of masculinity with their failure to conform to its heterosexuality." Not doing so has negative mental health outcomes, as Arana points out, and contributes to a culture that devalues fat queer people (see the popular "no fats, no femmes, no Asians" that often is touted in masculine gay subculture).

All of this, I think, is why Ragh's art for Junior Year was particularly impactful for me as a fat queer person. If being a gay man (or half-Orc, in Ragh's case) means having to situate your life in relationship to failing compulsory masculinity, then it seems there is an inherent queer aspect to embracing, celebrating, and showcasing a beloved NPC in an explicitly fat and happy body.

FHJY Ragh art by @caitmayart

Ragh is still strong and he is still fat. His body radiates a commitment to the power of fat bodies to exist in spaces they are often violently unwelcome in, such as gyms. Existing in gyms and sports spaces as fat people means dealing the "impossible standard that rejects nearly all of us" and upholds a diet culture rooted in impossible, Eurocentric and colonial body standards. In TTRPGS or actual plays, there is a unique opportunity to think about how bodies might exist in worlds different from ours, to imagine bodyminds as otherwise. However, as queer critics like Paul Preciado have noted, sci-fi and fantasy representations of cyborgs and other transformative bodies often lean into "fixing" disabled people or moving gender nonconforming bodies more easily towards technologies upholding a normative standard rather than questioning the standard all together.

Spyre is a world that deals with similar issues to ours, even without direct one-to-one correlations, so it, too, is a place where the narrative and artistic choices should be examined in how it helps us interpolate the world the audience resides in. From the Applebees cultish adherence to a deity-based nationalism to the various representations of parental neglect and abuse and every side story in-between, Dimension20's flagship show does not shy away from difficult realities even when recasting them through fantasy. Ragh, as a half-orc gay son of a disabled single mother, then, I see the arc his fat body goes through as meaningful and intertwined with his self-acceptance and queerness. He moves away from the toxic masculinity engineered into his blood rush team to instead pursue coalition comraderie with his friends to the point that he and his mother end up joining a communal living situation with those friends and their parents. Ragh's body expands as his family does, as his ties to community do, and to me, the gift of his fatness is the invitation to expansion that it holds out to us as viewers.

[facelessoldgargoyle]

another reason that I can’t stop shaking Amy Dallon in a mason jar to turn her into butter. Is that. Her arc makes such a compelling critique of the nuclear family. Consider:

Carol not wanting to have a child, but “caving” to it because Mark promised he’d help. This isn’t stated in the text, but i think it can be reasonably absurd that they were trying to create the image of a family.

Carol’s obsession with feeling safe with a child because it came from her body. It reminded me strongly of Purity’s obsession with her own baby being free from the contamination of the world, and her ex specifically. That parallel immediately makes the ugly subtext clear: obsession with children being pure, and belonging to you, is Nazi shit.

the New Wave is built upon the image of the perfect nuclear family to the point of absurdity. It’s literally composed of two nuclear families, and they perform virtue while hiding dirty secrets. Additionally “the new wave” has always sounded reminiscent of “the third wave” to me. I’m not sure if that was on purpose, but the resonance gives the name an extra sprinkling of fascism.

So into this set of conditions enters Amy. She is mistrusted by her new mother and neglected by her new father and she doesn’t fit into the image of the perfect family. She resents her own power because it exhausts her, but I think that if she could be masked and maintain a civilian identity, she might be able to relax and recharge. This is not allowed by New Wave.

The nuclear family is thus the source of all her problems. Subsequently, Amy is positioned as the nuclear family destroying itself.

Amy’s incestuous feelings are a perversion of the love that the nuclear family is supposed to embody. They arise because the family has failed to embrace her, and shut her out of it. The family causes its own destruction.

Amy’s lesbianism is a perversion of the nuclear family’s ideal of heterosexuality. Changing Victoria’s mind so that she reciprocates is a replay of the homophobic tropes of fifties and sixties lesbian pulp novels, and it literalizes the straight fear that gay people will “corrupt” their children. By playing out a story from conservatives’ worst nightmares, we can see how the fear causes the problem to occur. Carol feared Amy because she reminded her of her father and because she was an intrusion on Carol’s designed family. This fear caused Amy to be shut out, which means she didn’t instinctively view Victoria as a sister, which left the door open for romantic feelings. In the real world, parents’ fear that their children will be corrupted and taken away from them causes them to be controlling and bigoted. This is what drives children away.

Amy’s destruction of Victoria’s body happens as a result of her loss of control, and it happens while the two of them are isolated from the rest of the world. Amy introduces stray cats and dogs and rats—vermin—to Victoria’s body. This literalizes Carol’s fear of contamination, and remakes Victoria so that she no longer came solely from Carol’s body. Amy’s loss of control here frames her more as a carrier of disease than an active agent, in contrast to the last bullet point. The fear of genetic contamination from diseased people plays on very old antisemitic tropes, and again, is Nazi shit.

It’s compelling on the same level that Greek tragedy is! It’s wildly homophobic, but it’s so deliciously ironic.

[duncebento]

basically basically basically a lot of people (white in particular since u refuse to learn the histories of black community organizing) act as though they are speaking intracommunally when they tweet or whatever, which for obvious reasons is not true. like everyone can see that shit. but because they have no concept of the outward-facing nature of their discourse, they will say shit like “there are lesbians that have sex with men” which, if you give it the benefittttt of the doubt and add a bunch of qualifiers, is like okay whatever yeah all attempts to categorize human behavior will fail, and sexuality is fluid, and certain behaviors will always slip through the cracks blablablabla.

but the main statement they are making, “there are lesbians who have sex with men,” is, again, not being spoken across the table at a gay bar, is not being written down in a journal, but is being made in a public online space, meaning it has a potential impact on the outside world. and what lgbt kids of this decade have oh so stupidly forgotten (what we have been able to forget bc of the blessings of our predecessors) is that the shit we put out in the world is not just theoretical, is not just academic, is not just personal, but is strategically designed to make an appeal to and to reckon with mainstream narratives. (the very alliance of “lgbt” is not naturally occuring, of course, though for young people it may seem so. it is, in fact, a tactical alliance.)

SO, if we think for even a moment about mainstream narratives, the sentence “lesbians can have sex with men” does not bring to mind the failure of the social construct, the fluidity of sexuality, the decolonization of sexual roles. it brings to mind, quite obviously, the historically prevalent oppressive role that a heteronormative society, its heterosexual men in particular, has played in “turning out” lesbians, often to the extent of corrective rape. it is myopic to think that fighting for a prioritization of fluid sexuality in conversation is at all more urgent than combatting the still very prescient narrative of lesbian women possessing an innate biological urge for heterosexual sex that can be “unlocked” via certain means.

in our current climate, insisting that lesbians can have sex with men keeps lesbians in danger of homophobic sexual abuse, misogynistic harassment and kidnappings, and all the other historical accoutrements of that narrative. insisting that lesbians do not have sex with men, on the other hand, puts certain members of our community— say, women who identify wholly with lesbianism while still having one particular man they enjoy sex with— at risk of being called “problematic” by gay 20-somethings online.