#understands the queer experience and writes in a way that makes it possible for cis/het performers to understand what theyre playing with

[tigger8900]

Goliath, by Tochi Onyebuchi

⭐⭐⭐⭐

It's just a few short decades from now and humanity has moved on from Earth to the stars, leaving those without the means to pick up the pieces planetside. Even as those with privilege begin to colonize space, the people left behind — largely Black and brown — defy their poisoned environment and crumbling infrastructure, banding together to create safe havens. And then the colonists, those who'd once fled, began to return, seeking new experiences and a return to authentic living back on Earth. Featuring an ensemble cast, this novel seeks to explore not just the Earth's demise, but also the story of what comes next…and who stands to inherit that future.

I've often said that speculative fiction is very much of the time it's written. Accordingly, this novel, begun in the mid-2010s and published in early 2022, is very much of our times. And yes, it is very political. How could it not be, with themes including eco crises, mass incarceration, white supremacy, class and racial privilege, healthcare inequality, police brutality, white flight, and gentrification? The job of good speculative fiction is to use a fictional narrative to illuminate something of our own time and place, and in that regard this book is stellar.

The book's biggest strength — its varied cast of characters, painting a picture of the future through several distinct narratives — unfortunately also contributes to its biggest weakness. This is due to the way the story is told, with the narratives fragmented and presented non-linearly. While I believe my sense of the whole is complete, or near enough, I'd honestly struggle to tell you, start to finish, what precisely befell each character in the story. There's nothing quite like seeing a character pop up in a scene and having to pause, confused, and think to yourself: "I thought he was dead by now!" I'm not sure that reading it again would help. I think I'd likely have to break out the index cards and start laying the plot out down the hallway to make complete sense of it. Honestly, some kind of dates on the sections would have helped, but that would have ruined the near-future feel of the disaster so I understand why the author left them out.

I also have to mention that this book frequently calls upon Christian themes, ones that go beyond the David and Goliath reference. It's not terribly surprising, given the historical role of spiritual leaders in community organizing, but based on what blurb you read it's easy to get caught off guard. I will say that the book was never preachy, so this is certainly the better kind of Christian-inspired fiction, but if you're someone who avoids such references for whatever reason you might want to give this title a pass.

On a similar note, there's something about the gay couple in this story that gave me pause. Specifically, it's that the only gay couples are among the colonizers. All of the people who'd been left behind on Earth were depicted, as far as I could tell, pursuing exclusively cis-het relationships. I know I'm prone to paranoid reading when Christianity and queerness meet, so I've spent a fair bit of time turning this over in my mind before I sat down to write this, to try to be as fair as possible about a book that, overall, I enjoyed. Ultimately, I don't see any evidence that the author was attempting to make a point by writing it this way. I'm not mad about it. But that doesn't mean that this doesn't have the potential to be disturbing to some readers, so I wanted to mention it.

Last, but not least…do the horses die? Mild spoilers ahead, stop reading now if you don't want! A handful of wild horses are rescued and adopted as community livestock. These horses later die in a stable fire. Their demise is not narrated in detail, but it's made clear that they don't survive.

[strangertheory]

How not to talk about queer relationships: part 1

It is unfortunate that some fans will focus their attention on people that hyper-sexualize the relationship between Mike and Will instead of noticing the many, many queer fans that hope and dream of seeing a realistic, affectionate, wholesome and loving queer ship develop between two young teens figuring out their feelings as they grow up in a conservative small town.

I find it unfortunate that this person and many other fans are preoccupied with the idea that having a canon queer ship should be avoided because some folk might fetishize it. The deep irony of this logic is that if we had more wholesome representation in the media and more well-written and nuanced relationships between queer characters, wrongful perception of queer relationships would improve overtime in our society, and people would eventually not fetishize queer couples as much as they do currently.

A common reason that things are fetishized is because they are seen as taboo or unusual. In an ideal world queer people would be perceived as neither taboo nor unusual.

Queer people are not fetishes. We are people with feelings and lives and yes we also have desires too. LGBTQA+ people fall in love and experience feelings just like cis-het people do. And the queer community, and queer ships, should not be treated like something dirty or problematic that "shouldn't be canon" just because some people choose to hypersexualize them. LGBTQA+ individuals have the right to exist in fiction and in the real world without being treated like something lesser. Our love is just as beautiful as love between cis-het couples.

I recognize that the person who wrote this might not have meant to be prejudiced. They might even be queer themselves! They might have truly thought "I hate how people fetishize queer relationships" and then came to the conclusion that this means we need fewer queer relationships in the media. (Yea, I know: it doesn't actually make sense. Maybe they weren't thinking. But I want to give them the benefit of the doubt and label this as "accidental prejudice.")

But, as I've pointed out: this logic is inherently flawed. We need more queer representation if we want to fix this problem, not less.

I think it's a bit unfortunate, and a product of society's unhealthy fetishization of gay men as being hypersexual and threatening, that the most popular homosexual ship in the fandom is Harringrove rather than Byler, especially considering all of the narrative hints that Mike and Will have feelings for one another. @hawkinsschoolcounselor has a great write-up on this issue here that I strongly agree with.

The gentle, protective, and affectionate dynamic between Mike and Will in Stranger Things is incredibly beautiful and I think it has so much potential to be a well-developed, realistically portrayed queer relationship in the series. While I understand that it might not happen, I think it would be a severely missed opportunity if it doesn't, and I firmly believe that all of the subtle groundwork in the story is already there and that the writers intend to follow through with it.

Just because some fans can't "see it" doesn't mean it's not there. The number of people that still insist that Will is straight still boggles my mind. But I'm also used to people making that assumption in the real world, too. The same way that people dismiss the possibility of queer characters in popular media, they dismiss people in the real world too. We are constantly having to be loud and proud because if we aren't, our rights and our experiences and our feelings are ignored because people either assume we don't really exist, or that we are rare and unlikely to exist in their social groups, or that we are lesser and a perversion and not equally worthy of representation and consideration and love.

These assumptions are destructive and wrong.

[noctomania]

Just because life is complicated doesn't mean i need a complicated acronym. Life is complicated, so i prefer to make things as easy as possible. I'm simply queer.

I don't like complexity, in that it can be not only difficult to express & explain matters, but also it makes manipulation of the facts easier.

I don't need to give you details about my life or body. That's for me. Your life is your own. I'm queer & tell you this so you understand not to impose assumptions framed by a cis and or het and or allosex normative perspective. To inform you that my personal experience may differ from yours - or that we may relate on that experience.

I don't need to tell you what letter i am, i don't have to fight for representation in an acronym when it's considered inconvenience, i don't have to read into how someone chooses to organize the letters. There is one way to spell queer.

Lgbt+

Lgbtqia

Lgbtqisap+

Gltb

Tglb

Btlg

Etcetcetc...

Vs.

Queer.

This is why i am queer. I respect all who are inclusive & part of lgtbqisap+ but i have issue with the acronym, trying to build an acronym that is ultimately used to leave ppl out or re-write history.

[theinkstainsblog]

I see it this way. To Kill a Mockingbird, The Great Gatsby, Lolita to name a few are harmful and problematic but for years and years the school system requires these books to be read by 14-15 y/os. Also, a lot of classics we're forced to read are pretty racist. I didn't know if at 14/15 if I had a choice to skip them, but I felt like I had no choice. Now schools try to ban books like The Hunger Games, The Scarlett Letter, even Harry Potter. (1/5)

But now we have something called “Banned Books Week” where libraries and schools put them on a shelf for us to read b/c it promotes analytical thinking and the government shouldn’t be allowed to censor books. Not to mention, if I read a problematic book in a college level English class, the only way to prove my point is by reading the source material. A college professor would laugh me out of university if I wrote my paper like this: “Lolita is problematic because my friend said so.” (2/5)

I’m aware that there are some people who read these books b/c they get the giggles from doing whatever they please, but I honestly think it’s important for discourse for people to read those books if the content isn’t triggering to them specifically. For instance, with Carve the Mark I have read multiple reviews by POC on blogs and Booktube who did not see the racism AT all (the chronic pain issue is another story). I’m a POC so I decided to listen to other POC. If I had just listened to (3/5)

two non-POC say, “It’s racist! Don’t read it!” I’d never know how those two opinions might have been skewed a little. The natural course of action would be to seek out the source itself and read the book or listen to more than two opinions. As it stands, the CTM doesn’t interest me at all so I haven’t read it, but I based my opinion on people who DID read it anyway and were people like me. I personally can’t listen to a handful of people claim something until I have the source or context. (4/5)

I wouldn’t read a problematic book just to be funny and try to offend people, but because I can’t know what I’m talking about unless I have more information. If I went to college and my professor asked me to write a paper on CTM and my paper said, “Based on my sources from Goodreads, this book is problematic, here’s *their* opinion, not mine” the professor would fail me. Anyway, that’s just my thoughts. I get where you’re coming from but I just wanted to offer another explanation. (5/5)

6. Sorry, last thing!! Obviously, if a book is blatantly homophobic especially if written by someone who is NOT queer and the LGBT+ community says so, I personally would NOT read that book. If it relates to race, as I’m a POC I just feel obligated to seek out more information b/c many non-POC have claimed racism when, I, as a POC did not see any (or vice versa). It depends case-by-case for me. I know this was long…

Hiya! No worries about it being long, I’m really interested by this sort of thing so I’m happy to discuss it. I do understand what you’re saying, and I don’t disagree that it’s good to try and get all of the information so that you can form your own opinions however I do want to raise a few points. 

You said that when it comes to books critiqued for racism you might read them anyway as a person of colour, but not if it was a book critiqued for homophobia. I think that’s a super important distinction to make there - because that’s you wanting to find out for yourself something that impacts your own lived experience. I don’t see that as harmful in any way, it’s you that’s being affected by it so you have a right to do whatever you want regarding that. It’s great that you listen to the LGBT+ community as well though, that’s what I’d love to see more of - white people listening to people of colour on issues impacting them, cis het allo people listening to LGBT+ people on issues impacting us, able-bodied people listening to disabled people and so on. 

The issue with buying them just to find out for yourself what’s going on is that the publishers don’t know or care why you bought it. All they care is that they got your money. And if they get enough money then they’ll publish more books like that which is really the opposite of what we want. People can write whatever they like of course, I can’t stop them but I hope the aim for most of us is to get better and better representation.  So it’s best not to buy these books if you can and prevent that from happening - but especially if you’re not the person impacted by them as I said. That’s why I personally feel it’s best to avoid the most harmful books as much as possible.

On your point about books like Lolita and To Kill A Mockingbird being potentially problematic, I don’t disagree with you however I think we have to take older books a little differently to books being written now. Attitudes at the time were different and - while that doesn’t make them right or okay in ANY way - we have progressed since then. Classes should discuss problematic elements and dissect them absolutely. But someone who writes something problematic now is a far far different problem than older books with outdated views.

Of course, all books (and films and shows and people) are problematic to some degree. It’s impossible not to be. When I say I found a book problematic I genuinely mean that the premise is narrative is so inherently flawed or harmful that it’s just not redeemable. As opposed to a book that only has one or two problematic lines in it in which case I would draw attention to those lines to warn people who may be hurt by it, but I would not discourage people from reading it.

Also, I do think it’s important to consider that even within a community or marginalised group, we all have different experiences and while we personally might find something okay, that doesn’t mean it’s not still harmful. Personally, I have read Carve The Mark because unfortunately I had ordered it before I heard about the issues and I made an effort before reading to read as many reviews as I could find (positive and negative) by people of colour. What I found was that while some weren’t offended or hurt by the issues, the issues being talked about definitely were there. Just different people take offence to different things. And I think that’s the case for a lot of problematic books - the issue is there, it just might not affect everyone. 

Similarly, this is why I don’t like own voices books being critiqued as problematic - for example, I’ve seen reviews of a book by a bisexual author being called problematic because the bi main character is promiscious. Because everyone even in a community is so different we also have different ideas of what good rep looks like. And while being promiscious is a bi stereotype I’d like straight people to stay the heck away from, bi promiscious people do exist and them writing their own stories shouldn’t be critiqed for that. 

At the end of the day, these are just my views and I’m not gonna jump on you if you disagree or if you read a book that I found to be harmful. I just want people to be aware and critical of these issues. Sometimes problematic fiction can cause real life harm or at least mirror it - black people being portrayed as violent savages in Carve The Mark does nothing to help black people being perceived as violent thugs in real life for example. If people choose to read it anyway then I can’t stop them, but ideally, I’d at least like them to be aware of those issues so they can discuss it and minimise the harm caused.

And that is why I never shut up about representation.  

[corvidprompts]

How to Write A Queer Character

I When You’re Straight/ Not Trans/ Not Same Gender Attracted

(also- I feel like tumblr has a sort of ‘you should already know this’ attitude sometimes. There’s no shame in asking questions, okay? I promise, I’m always safe to message.)

First: How to write a Same Gender Attracted Character (gay characters, lesbian characters, bi characters, pan characters, ect)

(also, why I use the word queer here)

But Crow! You’re AroAce!! Yeah, but I’m hella gay. I don’t think I can explain it in a way that will make sense to a non aro person but basically I do have a really strong preference for platonic/alterous (basically an attraction that is not wholly platonic or romantic- if platonic is green and romantic is red, alterous is yellow attraction. This is an aro term.) to girls (and trans/nb folks, though I don’t know many irl) Seriously, I have like no guy friends. Not even queer guys.

I would advise you guys to absolutely write queer characters, but I wouldn't advise you guys to write an entire story about the experience of being queer. There’s just some things that kid of get missed when try to write in depth in the experience. Queer character yes! Queer story, no. (this is different than writing a love story where the leads are queer!)

First off: Some people will always know they’re queer. Some people will figure it out when they’re still young. Some people won’t know for a long long time.

If your character is just figuring it out, or is bi/pan ect and has only has crushes on the opposite sex so far,  they might not understand what their feeling is a crush. This is due to something called internalized heteronormativity which is an ugly little voice inside queer folks that might insist that it’s not possible to feel this way towards  [X], or that these feelings are wrong and you should quash them.

A lot of people who are queer may spend a long time insisting they’re straight, or even making up crushes on the opposite sex/ dating the opposite sex because they haven’t realized or aren’t ready to realize they’re queer.

Second: Queer characters are in fact, always thinking about how queer they are. When you’re in public with the bae and you both decide not to hold hands ‘just in case’, when you go to yet another movie with a random het love plot thrown in, when you finally get a queer character in a tv show and you immediately start fearing they’ll be killed off.

Third: literally no queer person is going to pressure their bae to come out. That whole ‘what are you, ashamed of me’ nonsense? Literally everytime I see it i roll my eyes in disgust. That’s not a thing that happens. (I mean, it might. But very, very rarely.) 

fourth: every queer person knows other queer people. all of them. When i first started school post moving during junior high (year 8) my friend group had 1 out person. By the time we graduated highschool, all of us were out. all of us. And there were more- at least 20 people of my graduating class were out as queer. Even before you realize you’re queer, you’ll probably flock to other queer folks.

Anyway, back to specifically gay/bi characters- It’s possible that even after the dating occurs, the couple won’t tell anyone theyre dating, even if theyre out. Case in point i came out as a ‘lesbian’ when I was 14 to my mom (long story), i’ve been dating gf#1 for 3 years? Have not once hinted to my mom we’re actually dating. This goes double for poly relationships or relationships where one/both is trans. 

Some queer peeps will specifically try to meet a stereotype (gay guys dressing nicely, lesbian lades wearing flannel and having short hair) with the hopes of communicating to other queer peeps that they are, in fact, queer!! not always, but sometimes.

Queer people are often much much closer with friends than blood family. This is because blood family can be horribly homophobic, but most of your friends are also probably pretty fucking queer. If you’re writing a queer character with straight friends, and the straight friend outs them unnecessarily (ie. to another straight friend), it’s a huge betrayal of trust.

Even if two queer characters hate each other, they’ll both have each others back involving homophobic/transphobic incidents.

I’m getting disorganized. Onto trans characters

Both sex (biology) and gender (an identity) exist on a spectrum. That’s right friends intersex people exist!

I’m not intersex (as far as I know) so I’m not super qualified to talk on the subject, but long story short that ‘2 sexes only!!’ nonsense? is garbage. This is a pretty good intro post on what intersex means.

Being trans is not ‘you’re a woman, but imagine if you’re a man’ or vice versa, like some people think. It’s ‘You’re a woman, but society says you fit some stereotypes of a man and will aggressively try and force you to exist as a man, including using the wrong restroom with the threat of violence, even though you’re a woman’ or vice versa.

This is kind of difficult to explain, but basically.

Trans people do have a sense of their gender in their head (I’m genderfluid, so for me that sense does change. I’m not sure why exactly, but some days I’ll feel more masculine, or more feminine, or more ???. There’s just a sense of it that’s hard to explain)

Dysphoria is basically the sense that your body doesn’t line up with your gender. This is mostly caused by societal expectations- a lot of trans guys/ dfab people will have dysphoria over them tiddy because tiddy=female to most folks, but not over whats in they pants since no one sees that, so it won’t be a ‘gender clue’. 

Second, an important thing to remember is that cis guys and trans guys have the same gender. Same for cis girls and trans girls. Same gender.

Also, trans people are less likely to come out then gay/bi people. Especially to family members. Literally, upon coming out as a lesbian my parents made me promise I would ‘stay a girl’.

Failed step 1.

Anyway. Please for the love of god, don;t do the scene where someone finds out that your character is trans because they walk in on them undressed. Don’t do it. I’m begging you.

Pronouns are also a Big Deal to trans folks. Please respect the pronouns. Most trans folks do not have ‘preferred pronouns’. They have ‘pronouns’.

(I say most because some nb folks do have preferred pronouns but are also okay with other ones, but as a general rule. Pronouns. No exceptions.)

Uhm.

Yeah.

jazz hands

I feel like there’s more I should put but my brain just died so