#thinking about about queer space and queer spaces

[drdemonprince]

People who are concerned about problematic or triggering kinks often couch these concerns in highly reasonable-sounding reactions and make what seems like highly reasonable requests.

They point out that lots of the most upsetting kinks may remind a person of their worst traumas, for example, and that these kinks, when played out, can resemble actual abuse so closely that the kink communities may attract bad actors who genuinely do wish to do harm.

They may allow that some kink practitioners are themselves survivors, and tolerate taboo kink's existence insofar as the correct people find it therapeutic, but they'll qualify that it should always be made clear what is fantasy and what is reality.

But ultimately, people making these arguments will assert, there are certain things that a simply beyond the pale -- across the line and wrong.

A lot of people say these things earnestly, and mean them, and I don't think they intend any harm in saying them. And in comporting their own personal lives, these guardrails may more or less apply well for them. But where it becomes a problem is in issuing dictates about how other people should act, and how kink friendly spaces should run, and how people who hold taboo kinks ought to be regarded.

Does it protect victims to view their kinks as inherently morally suspect?

Does treating a person who is forthright about their taboo desires and who has found a consensual venue to express those desires as more potentially predatory than your random vanilla cishet man help us make kink spaces that are safe?

Is it *true* having a fetish or kink makes a person more dangerous than someone that doesn't?

What's an acceptable reason to have a taboo fetish and what's an unacceptable reason? Who decides?

How might linking sexual practices that are already highly stigmatized and associated with queernees to abuse lead to increasing those group members' vulnerability?

Are communities where vetting of sexual play partners and frank discussions of consent are routine somehow more dangerous to be in than the vanilla world, where such things rarely happen?

What is a suitable way of flagging that fantasy is fantasy and real life is real life? Who decides?

Are certain real life enactments of a fantasy always wrong even when they are consensual, simply because they look bad/intense?

Which practices are okay to partake in in real life?

Who decides? Who decides? What happens to the people who violate those other people's rules?

You don't have to be interested in every kink and you don't have to visit all kink spaces. It's fine if you find certain fetishes disturbing, gross, triggering, a deal breaker, or reminiscent of your own abuse (and I'm really sorry that those things happened to you). But those entirely legitimate feelings in NO way translate to a need for anyone to place restrictions on how others play or fantasize or comport themselves in their own spaces.

Not all spaces will be for you, but please understand that for those of us who are kinky and queer, 99.9999999999% of all social spaces in the world are already viscerally violently NOT for us. Let us have our spaces to pretend to be puppy dogs and kitty cats and siblings and vampires and home invaders and monsters and rape victims and rapists and murderers and dead bodies and babies and robots and dolls and video game characters and everything else.

You don't have to like it but you don't have the authority to say we don't get to do it, and nobody should.

[olderthannetfic]

Quote from a post: "the things created within fandom aren’t real - an individual fic can’t cause actual, material harm to a reader, even if it contains tropes that would be harmful or distressing if they happened in that reader’s real life; an author’s use of certain tropes or interest in certain characters is not indicative of their actual morals and values in real life; thought crimes are not real crimes - but fanfiction is produced by human beings who are themselves products of the societies and communities in which we all live, and these societies and communities all have flaws and failings.

which is to say, those of us who prefer to read male friendships as romantic do need to be aware that, no matter how enlightened on gender and its foibles we think ourselves to be, we are nonetheless influenced as modern humans by a modern tendency to discourage platonic physical and emotional closeness between men - especially straight men - on the grounds that two men having this sort of relationship is inherently queer and, in being queer, implicitly sexual [an understanding of queerness which is another powerful societal influence on our thought, even if we know we don’t agree with it.]"

Okay this is from a big post from a big fandom account here please don't speculate who it is this is not about them specifically and has nothing to do with them i genuinely respect this poster and they are nothing but a supportive space and don't have any anti-nonsense. But I wanna talk about this point that they are making "the society is queering straight friendships" which is something also the anti-fujoshi crowd is saying and honestly I can't agree with that point.

I don't think its us the people who make fandom are queering the relationships between two straight men but the patriarchal system we live under and straight men themselves are doing it to themselves. They can't show love and affection to each other lest other dudes will call them gay not because there are secret fujoshis around that sexualize them. They can be vulnerable period lest everyone calls them whiney like women. I feel like (and most of the things I say here are vibes, not facts) men having close friendships with other men are green flags, and most women are excited to see men who have exact the strong relationship that are portrayed in media.

I'm confused by this talking point to be honest. I also understand that by saying everything I said above I sort of said the same thing as the original poster. In a sense that society is the problem here and we live in a society as we know, but... idk I feel like what they say is "we live in a society where everyone by default is sexualizing male friendships" which sounds like the standard anti-fujoshi talking point to me.

And regarding the point of romantic relationships being prioritized over platonic— I feel like is a complete bullshit to be honest.

Romantic relationships are prioritized over platonic ones across the board. Straight couples leave their straight friends behind when they get further into relationship too! I don't understand this impulse to constantly talk about romantic vs platonic thing when its about queer ships, and maybe there is somewhere straight ship discourse about romantic vs plantonic but its not as big as with mlm or wlw ships.

And honestly even with this take I feel like romantic relationships are also not prioritized but rather are more encouraged. And there is difference between encouraging and actually prioritizing I think.

(I want to add here that I'm not aroace so maybe its a blindspot and from that identitys point of view the dynamics might be different)

In reality I think both are equally hard to obtain and maintain. I always felt like the fandom being so shipping focused was not about people being hellbent on romance but just the fact that good love stories are few and far between both in fiction and IRL and we can't help but try to make something at least remotely good, or interesting or satisfying.

Again, my main problems is: 1) I don't agree that romantic relationships are prioritized to that high degree over the friendships like everyone claims. 2) I don't think that every single person is actually a secret fujoshi waiting to make any straight male friendship gay. 3) Fandoms are romantic ship centric because people just want more narratively satisfying romantic stories that are underrepresented in media (or they don't get to experience it IRL) rather than they are vehemently against platonic ships.

I don't know this hopefully came out coherent.

--

The person who wrote that sounds like a pretentious twatwaffle, and I am so sick of seeing otherwise reasonable people spout that crap. That's been true since the 90s and probably before.

The reality is that Western culture enshrines male friendship as the highest form of affection possible. This goes back to the Classical world. And, yes, they were probably fucking too back then, but the thing that all of the media is about is friendship.

The entire backbone of Western culture is built on the idea that men are spiritually, biologically, inherently more capable than women of this highest form of relationship. Romance is the big thing for women because we're not eligible for The Pure And Holy Friendship Between Two Men.

The epidemic of male loneliness is real, but we haven't gotten any less "Bros before hos". Fandom and m/m shipping behavior are irrelevant to this.

--

Furthermore, fandom has plenty of people who don't focus on shipping.

AO3 was built by slashers, so ship type is a top-level category, and the site obviously signals that it's about shipping and particularly non heterosexual shipping since you can filter out het.

Past sites often had more metadata that wasn't around ships (e.g. FFN's genres that work like bookstore genres) and almost never let you get rid of het. You might have been able to filter in The Gay, but straight stuff was literally unmarked.

~We do need to be aware of~

Bite me.

This naggy phrase is everywhere, and nothing good comes of it.

The only thing we need to be aware of is that Blorbo is great and s/he should be mashed together with Other Blorbo. If that's in gen adventures, you do you.

[jothb]

This post is like a honeypot for the type of guy I had hoped went extinct in 2018.

Men's liberation from what? The gay men need queer liberation, the black men need black liberation, the working class men need liberation of the proletariat. These are specific classes that men can belong to, which must be liberated. But men as a class in of itself - what do they need to be liberated from? What is this burden that the leftists and the feminists have placed upon them that must be fought against?

Feminists have failed men, because they would have never considered that in their own liberation they have broken the promise of servitude that men suffer so much for. I could have never figured that one out! Who could have known that the reason for men to feel betrayed by the left, is because the feminist and workers movements of the past decades have made it harder for them to own women as property, with current movements threatening to rid them of the power and authority they still have. I thought it was because lesbians were mean to them!

This entire post is just the whining of a man that thinks the oppressed class must take into account the feelings of every individual member of the oppressor class. He's complaining that feminist spaces are female dominated - what a shocker! He says that the "left" gives men nothing but suffering, (and I must admit I am quite eager for that to be the case) but as I look for a "misandrist left" I cannot seem to find one! There sure are plenty examples of women saying things along the lines of "Men Suck", but these are often said not as a theory, but as a slogan (besides perhaps the TERF movements, but to take their word for the movement being Misandrist would be as to believe that the Nazis really did just hate bankers). Instead I find analysis, some good, some shallow - like in every movement, trying to explain the material reasons for Patriarchy to exist, and how they might be changed. It feels either deeply ignorant or purposely dishonest to claim these works never take the male perspective into account. One is required at least in some form to describe the social pressures that shape the misogynistic behaviour. If we understand the material conditions that shape our men, we can change them for the better. And although removing and changing those conditions, those forces would lead to your "Male liberation from the forces of comphet", make no mistake - it should be focused and done as a liberation of women. Bringing women into the workforce en masse did, eventually, lead to men feeling less emasculated over having a working class wife, but it was done as a means of liberating women from the total financial dependency on their husbands. Would saying that it, eventually, lessened those forces, those societal pressures of Masculinity be incorrect? Not really, but it was not the goal!

And in this you find, that ultimately, all calls that feminists focus on "Men's Rights" and "Men's liberation" are in their nature demands that the feminist movements cease trying to upend the patriarchy. For it would be analogous to a factory owner demanding the working class not forget about his bourgeois interests in their socialist revolution.

You have yourself described quite simply why the struggle will get harder. As men realise that the looming threat of feminist thought and workers movements would kill not only the promise of female servitude, but also all hope of male authority over women, their reaction will get stronger, and more of them will join the anti-communists and anti-feminists. For this we must be prepared, and not spend time humouring the Nazis and the MRA

Also I did really laugh at the bit where you said "neckbeard is a slur"

On the topic of Leftist Andrew Tate and other mythical creatures of the liberal mind

[sheepwavehdg]

HDG(?) story thoughts: Socialization

Socialization is a noncon fic by ashinbloom and transfemtomgirl that examines the horrifying ways trans women are treated in queer spaces, especially by men, through the lens of the HDG setting and its mechanics.

I would describe it as "HDG(?)". It is notable as one of very few fics that the Loret team has ever specifically described as not fitting the HDG setting, and I can't even really say I disagree, exactly? It's fucking complicated. I dont enjoy Socialization in the same way I enjoy most HDG stores. I read it and I feel seen and understood in my experiences, it is a commiseration of the lived experience of a disabled person having to deal with violent transmisogny from within her own community as well as outside. I will be blunt- this story is not what I think of when I think of HDG. it is a twisted knife in my gut, a reminder of some of the worst things that have ever happened to me, and i cannot stop thinking about it.

It makes me feel less alone, to know that the ways I was mistreated and abused by some transmasculine peers in the past was not something I made up, that I am not alone(especially since gaslighting was always part of the toolkit anyway!) In this way, it shares commonalities with the rest of the HDG tag, in that the pain it reflects feels very, very familiar to me.

the premise is simple. It is a second person fic, which is a frankly brilliant choice, about a transfemme reader navigating a wardship. her transmasculine friend, who is already a floret, manipulates her into his bed and the vines of the affini.

It is notable that this summary, plotwise, is not any different from many existing stories within HDG. where it diverges is the tone. Victor is like if someone took every guy who I didnt break up with months past when I should have and combined them into a figure almost as systemically enabled to take advantage of you as his real life counterparts are. the worst part of all is the screaming voice in the back of my head that I can fix him. it is a spectacle to behold, and I eagerly await the protaganist to fall into his clutches.

The affini in the story are used more as a backdrop to tell a story about how humans are shitty to each other. I think It is meaningful more as a story about the transfeminine experience than as a story about plommy, and you should go into it expecting for it to hurt you, and for that pain to be a cathartic experience of being seen.

The best/worst part of reading Socialization is knowing I would do the exact same thing in the protaganist 's shoes. I would believe I could fix him. Watching someone with every one of my own weaknesses be pulled apart by a predator I have known intimately far too many times is arousing in ways that horrify me. I hate how much I love this story. I hate how I find myself rooting for Victor to pull the reader apart more, because if he wins, maybe she can be happy. It's incredible, I cannot wait for more, because I am apparently a deep masochist.

[potcconfessions]

"In response to the comments and reblogs in my previous confession (367), first of all I’m queer (trans and acearo), I wont apologizing for thinking your pirate jesus isn’t fruity, also death threats are inacceptable. 1) Some of your answers confuse gender expression with sexual orientation, which is wrong, just because someone wears makeup or gesticulates “weirdly” doesn’t mean they’re queer, you’re stereotyping, this can fall into racist territory too, as not every culture has the same way to express themselves of white people and a good portion of the fans (me too) think of Jack as at least mixed. 2) Actors saying shit during interviews (Johnny Deep “all my chars are queer” and Crook and Arenberg “Pintel and Ragetti are uncle and nephew”) are at best soft canon, if not outright non canonical as there is no evidence in the actual movies, it’s at the same level of the wizards terf saying their magic school principal is gay on twitter. 3) If we look at the factual evidence Jack ONLY FLIRTS WITH WOMEN and, in DMC, when he thinks a disguised Elizabeth (calls her "lad") is flirting with him, he immediately makes up excuses and doesn’t look too pleased by this perceived amorous interaction. 4) Jack is a master at pushing people’s buttons, as shown in the franchise (minus the shitty fifth movie), his interactions with James are like that because he knows that he hates that behaviour, due to his strict nature, also he invades people’s personal space all the time, no one is safe from it (even the governor receives this treatment), because he knows that it can make people uncomfortable fast. 5) There are plenty of examples of people fighting for certain rights but then shitting on other minorities (some gays being trans/acephobes for example), so him being against slavery isn’t a valid point, also he might fight for the freedom of other people because he knows it’s the right thing, but still being icked by certain things, it’s the human nature, it’s full of contradictions. 6) I’m an extreme multishipper and ship Jack with both Barbossa and Norrington, but shipping discourse is as canonical as my takes on everyone’s sexualities in the previous post and aren't a valid counterargument. 7) To conclude, thinking about it he could be considered aromantic, due to a line of dialogue about Angelica in OST (him having caught feelings for her and no one else), but due to the way he behaved towards her I can't think of him like that, for me he's simply an asshole towards women he wants to fuck and can't stand the idea of being vulnerable with them (due to OST storyline) and is squeamish about gays (due to DMC's dialogue)."

[anachronisticcrab]

I can't win with fucking allo people.

I love being aroace. I'm proud of it, I'm not ashamed of it, all of that. I don't want romance or sex or anything along those lines, and I'm happy with that.

But in a society that puts romantic love at the highest peak of importance, I'm left out

I've lost more friends than I can count because they got a partner and no longer wanted me around as much, because they asked to kiss me so I would know what it's like cause how could I not want to, because I wasn't comfortable playing dating sims with them.

I can't win with cishet allo people because they can't conceptualize it. They want things to be in their field of understanding, and I don't fit into that, so they question me. About everything. Then they get a partner and I lose them to some degree.

Its possibly even worse with queer people. My queer friends place so much of their identity in their sexuality that it's nearly impossible to fit into those spaces when your sexuality and romantic preference is nonexistent. Queer liberation has massively been about how love is love, but I don't fit into that and I never will.

Allo people would prefer it if I wanted to want a romantic relationship, I think. If I wanted to want it, then I wouldn't be broken. Then they could make dirty jokes about me instead of just with me. Then they could joke about how we were basically married without me ever recoiling in disgust.

Then they wouldn't feel as guilty when they forget about me when they get a romantic partner.

But if I wanted to want, allo people would double down on how I haven't met the right person or that I'm confused. If I'm not 100% happy being aroace all the time, I'm not aroace enough. And I'm clearly wrong.

Side note: Why do allo people think it's ok to wish they were aro and/or ace? It's not funny to joke about it when u are one of the people who fucking ostracize me for it. It's not funny when youre not dating anyone and call yourself aroace, it's not a choice and it's not silly. It's not cute when straight women call themselves lesbians because they're annoyed with men, it's not cute when straight men call themselves gay because they're annoyed with women, it's not funny when people joke about being aroace because they're annoyed with romance. Also, why do allo people not think before they say shit like 'if u don't fuck/date, what do u do? How are u human?'

I don't put a ton of stock into my new friendships with allo people anymore because I just fucking can't. If I do, I will be completely fucking crushed when they leave because I know that when I do value a friendship, I will always care more about the allo than they do about me. I am sick of caring about others more than they care about me, but this won't change until I meet another romance repulsed aro, who I haven't met yet because (shocker) being aro? Not the most common sexuality.

Tl;DR: I just... I can't fucking win. I'm too queer for straight ppl, not queer enough for queer ppl, too aroace if I don't go along with amatonormativity and not aroace enough if I don't. I'm lonely, my allo friends will always value others over me, and I constantly have people undermining my sexuality with stupid jokes and offhand comments. I'm sick of allo people.

[instantpansies]

sfth abigail is very tricky for me to headcanon bc i can't decide which is better: "tragically heterosexual" trans woman profoundly isolated in suburbia trapped in the only relationship she thinks she can have, or extremely in-denial seemingly cishet housewife caught up in traditional gender roles after a failed career in a male-dominated field and reminded of it every day.

both are so good and so full of potential and i can do both but it does have a bearing on how i approach a specific timeline/storyline i'm working on. idk, trans!abigail is so compelling bc she's in this very normative, very not-queer space and marriage, and i can imagine her experience as being just. so lonely. and she feels stuck there, in such a precarious position where there's nothing quite wrong but nothing at all right. and the trappings of suburbia are very restrictive of how she can even talk about herself or her marriage or her life. i also just get a very queer vibe from most of tom's women characters and abigail is no exception.

cis!abigail is super compelling too!!! mainly bc i think she is deeply closeted about something and i want to give her a horrible lesbian crisis in the middle of her decaying marriage. and i think that a trans woman who has been queer for a long time having a sexuality crisis is a very different situation from a middle-aged straight woman who has never even considered it and barely knows queer people exist. additionally, a cis woman marrying someone she met during her career, with the constant reminder of her failure and the weight of living up to her new role as a wife, has a ton of potential.

either way, gender is really important to (my interpretation of) abigail's character, and i want to find a way to depict her relationship with her gender and gender roles and her place in the society in which she finds herself, in a way that is interesting and compelling and does her justice. both are good, i just can't decide what to do for this storyline (that will end up determining how i think about and synthesize her story in general).

[wannabanauthor]

Since I’ve had more time to process the breakup and have read fellow shippers’ thoughts, I can see why Tommy decided to end the relationship.

Although I have no faith in the writers or Tim anymore, they can turn this around if they choose to.

And here’s how:

So the breakup scene makes sense through a PTSD lens. And I’m talking just about PTSD in general, not army related.

When you’re dealing with a PTSD episode, until it’s over, there is very little anyone can say or do to get you out of it. Your brain will not listen because it’s stuck in a loop and you can’t get out until it lets you.

Breathing techniques work, but the amount of emotions and nonsense you say will not let up until it runs its course. I’m speaking from experience, but I can’t say much about it because lawyers, etc.

Once it’s over, the amount of guilt you have for all the horrible things you said or did will hit you hard.

So for Tommy, he was fine until Buck asked him to move in with him. Tommy’s smile dropped instantly and he went into panic mode. It escalated when Buck mentioned engagement and marriage.

I think it’s possible a mixture of guilt over Abby and past experiences with other queer newbies, that set him off into a PTSD spiral.

Buck unknowingly hit a trigger(s), and Tommy instantly shut down.

That conversation went from Abby to moving in, and it was completely out of left field. There was no real buildup to it from Buck. He just asked Tommy and made this sort of people-pleasing speech. Instead of tackling the actual problem, Buck just went straight for progressing their relationship to another level.

Tommy’s guilt and past heartbreak flared up, and he probably thought he was back in that mental space after he broke up with Abby and dated someone and thought they would be forever, but it didn’t work out.

So he starts saying things like he can’t move in because Buck’s still new to his sexuality. He’s picking up the signs that he’s seen in previous relationships that obviously didn’t work out, and he got scared and panicked.

He really liked Buck and didn’t want them to go the same route as his past relationships where he either was the newbie or dated a newbie and thought it would be forever.

He’s stuck in the spiral and can’t see a way out because he’s terrified of getting his heartbroken if things don’t work out. So he ends the relationship and leaves. It doesn’t make sense to the audience or anyone else, but if you look at it from the PTSD perspective, it does make sense. Again speaking from personal experience.

Now am I saying this was intentional from the writers and Tim? No, not at all. They’re not smart enough for that. At least I don’t think they are. Only future episodes will confirm or deny this.

Now how to fix it:

Tommy has an emergency appointment with his therapist. He’s going to need it before and after the PTSD episode is over. The guilt and heartbreak from ending things with Buck is going to hurt him a lot. Especially since he called Evan “Buck” right after breaking up with him. He didn’t even realize that he ended things until Buck asked.

Once the episode is over, he’s going to need to process the whole relationship all over with the therapist and figure out where to go from there.

It’ll take him a few weeks maybe less/more before he reaches out to Buck to talk. It’ll be a reverse image of their coffee date, with him making the first step to mend things.

I think they could get back together and work it out, but they’d need to take a few steps back and probably go into couples counseling. Buck would also need his own therapist because he still needs to process being bisexual and actually using the word.

If they get back together, I can see them starting from the beginning again and progressing extremely slowly. Buck needs to learn not to rush into things. Even though he likes Tommy so much, he definitely was not thinking clearly when he asked Tommy to move in. There wasn’t even a natural transition in the conversation. It’s like Buck was having the conversation in his head and spoke out loud, which is a common adhd trait.

Tim Minear and the writers could get a few seasons content out of BuckTommy if they wanted even with how things ended in 8x06.

Now do I think this was the intention? Nope. The breakup seemed rushed and abrupt, and for all we know Tommy is gone forever. We can’t trust any interviews from anyone, so I have very little hope that Buck and Tommy can come back from this. I don’t trust the writers or Tim.

So there, I managed to cobble together some explanation for the breakup.

[valyrfia]

re: rpf and fandom discourse. i have a very controversial and sorta unpopular opinion on it so just bear with me. fandom has historically been a safe space for queer people to gather and express queerness through fics and other content which is why i think people who are queer want to guard it so viciously. on the other hand a majority of the time ive noticed it’s always non-queer people who feel comfy taking it out of non-fandom spaces where it will inevitably face ridicule and people will not know how to deal with it/people don’t moderate themselves talking about it. im rambling a little but, just an observation ive noticed.

I mean it’s an interesting one anon. On the one hand you could be right that us queer people are a lot more used to code switching and having different facets of ourselves that we switch on and off amongst different groups of people, whereas people who are cishet have never really developed that skill when it comes to talking about romance/sex/sexuality and therefore it doesn’t really occur to them that openly shipping two people of the same gender (which is a lot of fandom) will garner a different reaction to a het ship. We also, as you said, have a lot more to lose if fandom content is ever attacked en masse because a majority of queer content is STILL this community effort that largely originates from fandom whereas straight people will just read a romance book.

I think it’s an interesting take on interaction with fandom content as a whole! I wouldn’t say it’s a strict rule but it IS interesting to add this whole context of queerness into the conversation around fandom and fandom etiquette!

[liquidorcard]

Lily Orchard is very politically opportunistic and her posts on Palestine show how blatant this is. She presents herself as militantly anti-fascist and anti-hate, she claims to hate centrists who try to give fascists a space to speak (instead implying she'd be willing to use violence to stop them). But like, as soon as it comes to electoral topics, she aggressively, AGGRESSIGELY insists that the liberal centrist parties are the only viable option. Like, the guys she pretends to hate. To the point where she's victim blaming activists for Democrats losing the election and telling people not to listen to activists when they call for a boycott against the liberal centrists who are upholding the right for fascists to speak and politically act. She pretends to be a leftist, but it's blatantly performative, the reality is that she is centre right and she seems to hate herself for it. Kind of sad, honestly.

I've said something before here that Lily and I grew up in similar environments? Well, I honestly think that has something to do with it.

I grew up in a very right-wing household in a very right-wing community that like, I knew I knew from a very young age I wasn't ever going to be accepted in. Assigned Reject at Birth. You know, it's one of the many ways religious and right-wing spaces just tare apart interpersonal connections important to the human psyche. That makes a wound in people. I won't go into detail, but my home life was bad to begin with. Being queer just made it that much worse.

Before moving away for college, I very much believed I was the most left-wing any human being on this earth could possibly be. I thought I was going to be met with open arms and the unconditional human acceptance I had always wanted, even though I wasn't fully cognitively aware of that.

I wasn't. And I feel people were even less forgiving of my lack of leftist literacy because I was a queer AFAB and concluded there was no excuse for me to be as ignorant as I was.

Now, I know the discussion of the social policing and virtue grandstanding gets flattened of any nuance online so the right can use it against the left, so I want to make sure I'm clear with what I'm about to say. No, the left should not be tolerant of bigotry. No, not every right-wing nut job can be deradicalized by hand-holding them through their own come to Jesus moment. Nor is anyone owed that emotional energy from you. But when you were raised right-wing, even if you grew to resent it, a person needs time to be deprogrammed. And, I know this might upset people to hear, but you won't understand how much of a privilege it is to be raised in a more liberal household unless you weren't. People who were can sometimes be, what I feel is unreasonably hostile to those of us who don't know any better because we haven't had the chance to learn.

It also just so happens I started college in 2015, right when gamergate went down. And it was an art school. Really, it was a uniquely not very ideal environment to rid myself of right-wing brain worms. And in a very real way, it retraumatized me getting rejected for not having the sociopolitical context to understand everything I was expected to. I'm not blaming anyone in particular for that-- that is more an unfortunate symptom of the anti-social rot the right causes, but it wasn't a good time. I think some people could have been kinder, and to this day I do my best to be charitable with meeting people where they're at myself. And I do think there is a problem in the left, especially online, failing to read between the lines and respond appropriately-- especially when it comes to vocabulary choice. You know, sometimes people use dogwhistles without the proper context to understand they are dogwhistling, sometimes people are just genuinely misinformed and lack the language to ask the questions they have, and vocabulary does shape perception. Right-wing ideology only can survive on the basis of rigid, strict, conceptually or literally divine hierarchy. Right-wing language is shaped on the premise of that hierarchy. The reason why a lot of social progress doesn't make sense to right-wingers and is almost impossible to communicate properly in right-wing language is because it disregards the premise of that hierarchy. Right-wingers don't literally live in a separate reality, but they kind of functionally do. Mentally. For people who are more on the right, but open minded enough to genuinely learn and want to, it's better to use as their language as much as possible to explain to them things that can ease them out of the premise of that mental trap of explicit social hierarchy in a gentler fashion.

With all that said, the root cause was still that right-wing upbringing.

I feel I have more than enough reason to very confidently say Lily went through a very similar experience to me. A shitty childhood for a lot of reasons, but one of them for sure being a queer person in an extremely right-wing household. She has a hypersensitivity to feeling shame and will go to extreme measures to avoid it, she feels isolated and desperate for acceptance in an extremely unhealthy way. In one regard she was knee-capped significantly in her ability to function socially that I wasn't, in that her parents decided she was a simpleton when she was very young, basically wrote her off and conditioned her to never take accountability. Though being overly critical of children is equally harmful (though in different ways), dismissing a child of all agency because you think they're too stupid to handle it can result in a lot more damage to everyone around them aswell as themselves and is a form of emotional neglect.

Online I think she searched out for a community that would accept her, and when that did not work out for her, when she experienced that retraumatization again of rejection . . . She took some very interesting lessons away from that. The wrong ones.

And, glass houses, it took me a whole journey aswell to get where I am. But I was conditioned to internalize social rejection, for better or worse. Lily was not. She is aggressively, profoundly, depressingly incapable of self-reflection, in healthy or in unhealthy amounts-- and even though that's not wholly her fault, she's a big girl now, and she's the only one left to accept responsibility for that. As someone myself who feels deeply angry at the ways I was psychologically damaged, I'm speaking as someone who has accepted that dwelling on how unfair it is that I have to be held accountable for that isn't going to improve my situation.

Believe it or not, I don't think Lily is inherently stupid. I think she was treated like she was stupid since she was young, and has put a lot of energy into pantomiming intellectualism instead of actually learning stuff. Again, glass houses, I also learned how to pretend I am smarter than I actually am out of an extreme aversion to shame-- but I can tell I have more actual knowledge, interest and curiosity to learn than Lily does.

I don't think Lily has any interest in learning about left-wing politics, and I don't think she has actually deprogrammed herself from the right-wing environment she was raised in. She has no motivation to care, and likely still is deeply bitter about the social rejection she's experienced in left-wing spaces. However, she has a lot of social capital to gain by PRETENDING she is.

And pretending is enough for the people she courts in her audience.

[bixels]

this is coming from the position of a student, so don't take my word as gospel, but i want to strongly encourage people to prepare for the coming years and look outward to find communities in real life. this can be big like getting involved in fundraisers or organizations or small like going to poc/queer/art social spaces and talking to people. making friends and connections will help you and others build support networks, something you will need as we enter the new term. i know talking to strangers in real life can be scary, unfamiliar, or difficult (depending on where you live especially) and it may take a lot of compromising and work –– and i don't want to condescend –– but we have to try starting now. this is about your safety and welfare, as well as the most vulnerable people's.

if leftists/progressives/minorities want to survive and beat back what's coming, we need to do our work offline too and take up space. an example of getting involved would be (if you're an artist) reaching out to fundraising organizers and making prints of your artwork to donate for raising funds.

[shalom-iamcominghome]

"We need more diverse queer representation!"

You cannot even handle queer jews.

[redysetdare]

I think i just need to express that the culture surrounding QPRs right now made me think that i couldn't have strong bonds with my friends. Society told me i cant have strong bonds with friends because that was only for romantic relationships. Then i went into aro spaces and this idea was reinforced using QPRs instead of romantic relationships. it was "You can still have strong bonds with people without romance! It can just be a QPR instead!" "QPRs are MORE than friendship so you can have STRONGER BONDS than you would with friends."

it made me think that the relationships i wanted with my friends HAD to be something other than friendship for it to be as strong as i wanted. If i wanted to be the first person in someones life i had to enter some sort of committed relationship. if I wanted someone to care about me as strongly as i did them then it would have to be a relationship that was "more" than friendship.

I thought I wanted a QPR because i was told the only way to get that care and security that I wanted was to enter into a relationship that was "more" than friendship. because friends didn't care that much. because friends didn't live together their entire lives. because friends were never the priority relationship wise. and it took me years to realize that i didn't want any partnership and i shouldn't have to be in one to want these things from a friend. these things CAN be something friends can do. but i found that out on my own. because the aro community kept saying "you want a QPR" when i just wanted a friend who finally saw me as a priority in their life.

[fossilizedhysterics]

guess who finished tlok tonight and immediately had this come to him in a vision!!!!

[theladyinwhite13]

the whole “all cis men are bad and therefore all women are perfect and can do no wrong” (regardless of a persons actual beliefs or actions) ideology that i keep seeing in queer spaces is extremely toxic and unhealthy--especially coming from a community that generally criticizes gender and it’s accompanied stereotypes

and also all this does is refuse to acknowledge that abuse CAN and DOES happen in lgbtq relationships, the only difference is that by refusing to talk about it, people don’t know how to identify it, because no. abuse only comes at the hands of cishet men to cishet women right? but ignoring that something is happening is never a progressive way to address it.

and its wild that a community that can agree that gender is a societal construct will also use gender stereotypes to suppress people WITHIN their own community, even when it means being transphobic and biphobic

[transmaverique]

amab and afab, if they were used as shorthand for the actual full phrases that they signify, with emphasis on the "assigned" part, and an understanding that they are enforcements of normative (ie, dyadic and cisgender and binary) sex, would be like. really useful. but people took the terms and started using them as shorthand FOR normative sex instead of the ENFORCEMENT OF normative sex. so when other trans people (almost always dyadic trans people) ask for your agab they are almost always asking for your Original Genital Situation. your starting point, so to say. and the reason FOR asking is also almost always bc they are trying to also enforce a certain kind of normativity within queer spaces (which is stupid bc being queer is inherently non-normative but here we are). like, you cant be a lesbian if you're ftm, bc you ARE m, so if you ARE a lesbian, then that means you're lying about some aspect of your identity. does that make sense?

it is always always always incredibly.... i do not trust dyadic trans people that use cagab terms, even moreso than i do not trust dyadic trans people that just use agab terms. agab is also coopted intersex language, but the "coercive" part of cagab SPECIFICALLY refers to medical "intervention" of intersex characteristics, such as "corrective" surgeries and hrt. i am deeply fucking suspicious of any dyadic trans person that uses those terms exactly the same as described above, even moreso if they do so bc "all gender is coercive".

like. yeah. that's true. but you use these terms to erase and overtake intersex discussions on the medical abuse of intersex infants. and i cant help but wonder why you would feel the need to do that.