#Also it's kind of funny how. We are both some sort of gender queer | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

stardustdiiving · 4 months

Note

I love hearing about queer headcanons so I'll probably end up asking about all of them, but how about starting with Sumeru?

(ask in reference to this post)

YES I can do a few sumeru characters to start (heres Wanderer, Cynonari, Collei, and Nahida)

(there’s accidently aroace headcanons in 3/4 of them OOOPS)

Wanderer: talked about his gender (trans guy) here, sexuality wise I see him as gay and probably mostly t4t. I also have a vision where Wanderer has the same relationship with aro + aceness as Collei but in sort of opposite directions. So my idea is Wanderer feels a lot of alienation & detachment regarding romance & sex & shares a lot of similar experiences to aro and/or ace people, but would choose to not ID as either label because after some time he concludes his relationship with both kinds of attraction is very influenced by trauma, and it would be more healthy for him personally to work on building a positive relationship with romantic + sexual attraction since he does actually experience it. So he sits on a plane of not identifying as aro or ace but like he gets it

Collei: Collei on the other hand, in contrast to Wanderer, finds aro + ace labels really helpful for understanding herself, even if she also believes in her relationship with both kinds of attraction overlapping a lot with trauma. Because for her she genuinely just doesn’t really feel she experiences either attraction and that’s sort of a comfortable default/conclusion for her. Specifically I’d give her the demi aro and asexual labels…in my head this goes with my Tighnari & Cyno headcanons where both of them are in an aroace relationship and give her really good advice/feedback on her feelings that make her feel more able to be confident about how she feels regarding attraction. Along with that I think she’s sort of questioning sexuality labels but would refer to herself as sapphic as a shorthand explanation. Gender wise I have a few different headcanons in mind…either transfem, demigirl, or bigender/genderfluid maybe? I see her as having multiple ideas of what sort of gender presentation she wants and going between them

Tighnari + Cyno: Okay so here I need to pitch my demi-aroace Cynonari vision. I think both Cyno and Tighnari would view their own queerness in ways pretty similar to each other, and one facet of this is where they fall on the aroace spectrum. I think it aligns perfectly where they’re both like, yeah I have no interest in romance or relationships the way people usually engage with them but you’re the only one who gets the exact way I feel about it + we get along well so honestly I’m down to be in our own form of a relationship with you specifically. I don’t think they really do labels with a lot of things: both of them are trans + non binary in one way or another, and both use gay/queer as identifying terms, but don’t have a lot of specifications beyond using umbrella labels really. They’re just chilling. As established this ends up being a good fit for their dynamic with Collei bc I think it gives her a lot more confidence about navigating her own queerness seeing Cynonari just kind of hang out and do their own thing

Nahida: she’s baby and does not strike me as someone who is going to think about romance or sexuality until she’s a lot older. I think if you asked Nahida to explain her gender to you she would probably employ a lot of very confusing metaphors you do not understand, all in an attempt to articulate what I’d write as a pretty shared experience between all the Archons in how they view gender. They seem to like…view themselves as genderless but sometimes opting into gender if they feel like it—and tend to intuitively relate it to their element. Which means the most you get from Nahida’s metaphors is she’s telling you her gender is plant and you do not get it but it doesn’t seem wrong so what can you do. I also have this additional thought I think is funny about Wanderer and Nahida having very deep philosophical discussions about immortal gender at 3 in the morning. In the context of the English language at least I think we need to tell Nahida about neopronouns I think she’d be a fan. So in summary she’s kind of baby and is not giving this stuff much thought right now but also being a god in my gender impact dimension kind of inherently makes you ponder the orb (gender)

#gender impact #asks #fern.txt #cyno #tighnari #collei #wanderer #scaramouche #nahida #cynonari

19 notes · View notes

decompose1 · 2 years

Note

S2 Bow for the ask thing, because I know you have a very neat perspective on characters who do not-so-great things. :^J

THANK YOU SO MUCH :'D!! I love depth, and ii gives me some complicated characters to really pick apart!

Sexuality Headcanon: I think she's probably bi! Doesn't care too much.

Gender Headcanon: I struggle to see her as much other than a gal! Whether she's a cis or trans gal is really anyone's guess, i could see it going either way! I think she's very into committing to the femme thing, though. In any humanization i do of her, she's obnoxiously bubbly and dressed up, nails done, bows everywhere.... you get it. So girl but in a queer way!

Ship: I adore marshplebow as a polycule. I don't really like separating them, personally!! (I might be an outlier here? Haha!)

BROTP: PLEASE GET ALONG BETTER WITH DOUGH, I BEG. This poor guy is so lonely. I think they could have a very funny siblingy dynamic. ALSO! I feel like not enough people remember she was friends with Bomb. I wish that was expanded on a little more!! They could've had such a silly dynamic too. I would love to see him visit her, if he ever... finds out she's a ghost. I wonder how he felt about her death. He probably doesn't even know about purgatory mansion :o(. Someone should tell him. They could be girly-girl and weirdguy besties.

NOTP: I don't like shipping her with Dough. Regardless of whether they're actually siblings or not, feels a little weird.

Random headcanon: I honestly think she probably tried to leave the mansion a good few times before finding out she couldn't. My thoughts on MePhone4 having weird feelings about her go both ways, too. I really wonder how much she thinks about it. They died together. This fact gets sort of glossed over a lot, but i think it's pretty significant. Like i said in my analysis posts, it marks one of the DARKEST moments in ii's history. There were four deaths that day, all of which were really serious. ... I think they should talk at some point. I think both of them ignore it, because BOTH OF THEM run from their problems (MePhone's... entire thing, and Bow pretending not to care about being dead for a long time). Sorry, that turned into less of a headcanon and more of a thoughts blurb :V

General opinion: Bow is a fantastic character and i miss her dearly. I'm really hoping we get to see more of her. As much as i love BowBot/TBD, i ADORE original Bow and all of her depth.

I think of her as an incredibly lonely person. She was not this bad when she was alive-- a FIERCE competitor? Yes. Pushy? Absolutely. But not downright manipulative. She was just kind of a ditz. That changed when she died. We have to remember she was isolated in that mansion the ENTIRE TIME between her death and Marshmallow finding her. What she did was terrible, but i also see exactly why it happened. Because... of course it did. Because of course she was terribly lonely. How could she not be?? She just chose the absolute WORST way to keep a friend- by isolating them- and this, i think, was mostly insecurity over the idea of being alone again, fearful that Marshmallow could run off with Apple and leave her there. It was SO BAD. Marshmallow did not deserve to be lied to, and Apple did not deserve to be used like that. But it makes perfect sense. I think Marsh understood what happened.

I hope she's happier, and can mellow out, now that she has more people with her. I hope they're having a better time and a happier life out there, even if it isn't the perfect place to live :').

#bow makes me so very sad.#inanimate insanity #ii bow #object show community #object shows

18 notes · View notes

queerwhohatesithere · 9 months

Text

tw for sa

kinda comforting that the only person giving me shit on my post about misandry was a fifteen year old, so hopefully they’ll grow out of it. i feel like i’m uniquely equipped to talk about misogyny and misandry given that i have experienced both of them and also experienced physical violence on both sides of it by people of all genders lol so it’s rlly funny when i see ppl posting all sorts of bullshit ab who the only people capable of violence are. guess what? i was assaulted by a woman. actually, several women. sexually. the same thing y’all are on men’s asses ab all the time, acting like it’s only them who can do it, acting like they’re predisposed to it, like we have some violent evil nature inside of us. i’ve also been sexually assaulted by a man. and cat called, and harassed, and felt up. so i’m absolutely not saying it doesn’t happen but jesus christ the gender essentialism bullshit, i’m so fucking sick and tired of it.

don’t tell me i don’t understand. you don’t understand. the queer community especially needs to cut out this misandrist bullshit and understand that they are alienating trans men. do you hear yourself making jokes about how all men are evil and terrible while i’m sitting right next to you? this affects trans women too, i’ve had people express that they don’t know sometimes if people are talking about them when they say “men” bc once you get into gender essentialism it’s only a few steps away. this kind of thinking is dangerous. it leads to terf mindsets. i’m not posting about this again bc of one misguided kid i’m posting about it again hoping that it’ll maybe make someone stop and think about it more. deprogram the nonsense in your head. if we want to be equal, we have to be equal. we can’t be bashing each other or hurting each other. we need community, not division. i know i’m not the only person who feels like this because i’ve seen posts from other trans men. please listen to us.

#trans masc #tw sa #queer #chatters #trans #misandry #i don’t know what else to say

1 note · View note

sidneyfirefae · 1 year

Text

Hello!! I'm Sidney (she/fae). Welcome to my blog!

This is just my personal blog so it doesn't really have a theme or anything, just me reblogging stuff that interests me or feels important or is funny, etc. There's also an about me section further down, but first off, I wanna make sure to say this is a welcoming and safe space for:

TL;DR

All genders/gender identities (neopronouns/xenogenders included)

All romantic & sexual orientations

Intersex folks

Neurodivergent folks & mentally ill folks (if and when the distinction is important)

Self-diagnosed folks

All systems (traumagenic, endo, tulpa, etc)

Disabled folks (physical and mental disability)

Fat, plus-size, and other non-dominant body types

All religions & spiritual beliefs

All ethnic/cultural backgrounds

Kink

Furries

Probably forgetting some but will come back and add

Longer version

Queer folks!

This includes all members of the LGBTQIA+ community/communities outside of the Western episteme around what is considered "queer". Neopronoun users, intersex folks, ppl who are xenogender, and probably a lot of other things I can't think of are all welcome.

Neurodivergent & mentally ill folks!

Brains are Weird and the range of human experiences with said brains is very broad. There's still so much we don't really know, but I know to be kind. Self-diagnosis is valid! We are intimately familiar with the gaslighting and systemic/financial barriers involved in the diagnosis process and that diagnosis is not nearly as simple a thing as it's made out to be. People who self-dx have almost always done vast amounts of research into themselves and their experiences. Mental illnesses count as ND, as we have definitely experienced with OCD (although that's hardly the only exquisite flavor of brain sauce we have going on). It's still important to distinguish the two and be mindful of the nuance, especially since people's relationships to their own minds vary greatly.

Systems of all kinds!

Whether that be traumagenic, endo, tulpa, or any of the many other kinds of systems, plural folks are all welcome. I'm part of a mixed-origin system myself and can only restate the previous point that Brains are Weird. Plurality is a broad spectrum and can be both healthy and not; in our experience, having each other has been critically helpful and we can't imagine life without each other. Syscourse is ... a lot and we try to avoid it, and I think ultimately it falls into the same issues any sort of excessive online discourse does, which is forgetting to account for diverse lived experiences and the real people experiencing them. Don't fakeclaim people.

Disabled folks!

Mentally and physically disabled folks, spoonies (or users of other systems) and all. No matter your needs, no matter how far you stray from that terrible concept of "normal", you have a place here. I'll do my best to be as respectful as I can, but there's still a lot I don't know about, so I apologize in advance and thank you for bearing with me. We identify with the label of disabled, but our experiences are unique just like everyone else.

All ethnicities/racial backgrounds!

Just like everything else here, this should go without saying, but I just want to be clear. We have studied anthropology and the history of conceptions of race/racism, and we know how ridiculous it all is. We're all just people. We are POC, but our experiences are only of our own ethnic background, and we're always trying to learn more about other cultures and experiences.

Religions of all sorts!

Any and all religious/spiritual beliefs and practices, so long as they are not used to harm people. We're not religious, but we also know that religion and identities that have historically been targeted by religious institutions can and absolutely do co-exist. Like a lot of things here, we're not very knowledgeable about many religions, but we hope to express nothing but respect and curiosity.

Kink!

I'll admit I don't know much about kink -- I'm aspec and an incredibly romantic sapphic with OCD -- but just because I don't personally vibe with the incredibly kinky stuff y'all be getting up to doesn't mean it's wrong in any way. Sexuality means different things to different people, and as long as it is explored consensually and healthily, there's nothing wrong with it. One of our system members is quite kinky, so I know firsthand that mutual understanding and acceptance of varying sexual preferences is absolutely possible. I'm also not a furry and don't entirely get it, but y'all are lovely and just as welcome here.

There's probably a lot I'm forgetting, but when I remember I'll make sure to add it. Basically, don't be a bigot. People are people, and I love you all.

____________________

About me

Howdy! You can call me Sidney Firefae. I'm a grey-ace nonbinary sapphic trans woman who uses she/fae pronouns. I'm part of a nameless system with a range of interests, and consequently I'm currently the only one of us who uses tumblr.

Anyhow, thanks for reading. I know there's probably stuff I've missed, hopefully I remember and can come back and add it.

Have a nice day!

#do i need to tag pinned post?#pinned

0 notes

girldraki · 2 years

Note

✅ ⚧ 📝

…upon receiving this ask we immediately remembered we should’ve mentioned to specify members for asks but since we did not (which is on us) here’s whoever’s in front aka clef-eden draven epon and sort of celeste’s thoughts under the cut because there are indeed Too Many Of Us

📝 How do you feel about fanfiction?

mostly unilateral answer: its fine and we enjoy looking at it but people are wrong about things all the time. not mad about it, mostly it’s funny, but we wish people were less wrong about things sometimes bc going I didnt say that every ten seconds does kind of break immersion when youre trying to look at a nice story about that guy you happen to be

✅ What does the fandom usually get right?

clef: actually fandom is pretty on top of my whole deal in most ways, possibly more than anyone else in here :shrug:

(bonus eden answer: long hair and antlers. i guess im less overtly irritating than clef or ukulele?)

draven: um. actually not a whole lot that isn’t already direct canon i.e. my relationship with my mom or whatever. i like when people give me t4t swag with james i guess that’s real even if they usually come from a different direction than my stuff

epon: people really dont talk about me much esp in a headcanon-y way. i sure do have horns like everyone draws me with i guess????

kondraki: the repression 😐

⚧ What were your gender and orientation in your timeline; was your identity canon?

not only are we all ridiculous gestalts with probably-infinite-timelines we really dont get many source memories but. Sigh here’s the info we do have

clef: fairly similar to over here i was mostyl some kind of flavor of queer-romo aspec, which is fairly canon. i think i generally ided as a [cis] guy but more like in a “i don’t know what being nonbinary is“ way than a “im actually a man“ way? the nonhuman (always) and gender stuff were kinda mixed up but i didnt really have words for that either

(bonus eden answer: ace (canon) girl-as-discovered-literally-first-time-fronting (less canon) Headspace Gay (extremely not canon))

draven: lack of memories specifically involving gender is not helping out here. i was definitely bi (canon compliant) and also possibly kind of aspec (less so) and all attempts to return what my gender was are blackboxing so who knows

epon: i dont really have a good enough grasp on what’s up with any version of me to answer this one sorry

celeste: i’ve told this story but i was bi enough of the time to distinctly remember bottledick and “straight“ enough of the time to be adamantly insistent i was cishet for like two weeks after showign up here. both arguably canon compliant. i don’t think i was a girl before forming because that wasn’t on our radar at all but at the same time the last fucking triyearly new source memory i got was specifically about being a girl? the gender stuff objectively isnt canon compliant but i don’t care and canondraki’s a girl now

#ask #cornwallblorbo #clef post #draven post #epon post #celeste post

0 notes

discoveringsandra · 3 years

Text

Characters I project my transness on: Shrek's Fiona

GENERAL SPOILER ALERT FOR THE SHREK MOVIE FRANCHISE

A subversion af the damsel in distress trope, Fiona isn't an ordinary princess. She burps, kicks ass and is generally disappointed by actual princes.

In the first movie, she transformed into an ogre by night. She saw this as a curse until she learned to love both another ogre and this side of herself. Even if she hasn't always looked like an ogre, she ends up renouncing to normative beauty and living as one.

Then, she spends the second film trying to convince her parents to love both her husband and her identity, while his father tries to get her to fit into the fairy tale princess role she was meant to have. It turns out her father was just preventing her from risking his own position as human-looking king, since marrying her with a prince was part of the deal he made with a fairy when he was a toad (I can't blame him for wanting to make Julie Andrews his queen, though).

This film has many queer experience parallels, with both Fiona's parents and Far Far Away's elitist society being outraged by her life choices, as well as the father projecting his own anxieties about fitting in this society on to his daughter. I would say that there are a couple of kind of queerphobic jokes, one about the Big Bad Wolf being gender-confused (which is more or less okay since it comes from the main villain) and a really weird one on pinocchio wearing women's underwear (which is not okay since he is a child and they are mockingly confronting him on this to use his elongated nose).

Going back to our favourite ogre princess, the plot of the third movie has her staying back home while Shrek goes to find a heir for the kingdom's throne and overcome his parenthood anxiety. However, the Charming Prince she was supposed to marry on the second movie comes back and takes the kingdom during her baby shower. We get to see her starting a princesses' escape and fight evil goons while being pregnant, but I think se was kind of separated from the main plot so Shrek could come to her rescue again at the end, which is why this is the least interesting movie in the franchise.

The fourth movie does the "Its a Wonderful Life" thing where an unsatisfied Shrek goes to an alternate reality in which he has never been born. The version of Fiona we see there is a warrior, the leader of the ogre resistance to Rumpelstilskin tyrannical rule. She rescued herself from the tower she was locked in in the first film and it's implied she still becomes human by day and does some reconnaisance, but she is fully accepted among the ogres. Although she's got her own revolution going on, her whole arc is learning to trust Shrek so he can learn to not give her for granted once he comes back to his reality, which kind of undermines the whole revolutionary leader thing.

Still, drawing my own transgender parallel, the difference between this two realities in how ogres are treated can be seen as the difference in how real world countries treat the LGBTQ+ community. Main timeline Shrek and Fiona are more or less respected because they had a chance to fight for their rights as well as the privilege given to Fiona for being a princess. Resistance leader Fiona never had a chance to convince her powerful parents to respect her identity as an ogre because they lost their kingdom to Rumpelstilskin, who then started hunting down ogres, forcing them into hiding away from the rest of society. That's the present many queer people around the world have to live, the past those who live free can't forget and the possible future we'll never stop fearing.

This took a pretty dark turn so let's ask ourselves "what if Fiona was actually trans?" Well, if Fiona was a transgender male ogre, the plot would be essentially the same except the pregnancy in the third movie would be replaced by an adoption waiting list and the transformation in the second movie would be a metaphor for detransitioning out of family pressure. Also, male ogre Fiona (Finn?) would wear lumberjack shirts and his alternate reality version would cosplay Braveheart.

If Fiona was a transgender female ogre, though, the plot would be radically different. I think she would still dress as a princess when she was in human male form and there would be jokes similars to those on the Ugly Stepsister (oh, I forgot about her and her deep voice, she's "ugly" because she's got masculine traits, so funny 😒) but with some sort of catharsis once she becomes permanently an ogress. I guess Farquad would be extra rude to her but she would still think she had to marry him to break the curse, then Shrek confesses her love, enter the dragon and I'm a believer. I guess Prince Charming would still try to marry a remasculinized Fiona in the second film (come on, he's a queer coded villain) and, for sure, the king would still try to fool her to do it. The third and fourth movie wouldn't change much, as Fiona's past human form is irrelevant in the third and she never appears in human form in the fourth. Maybe her daylight human male form would be a more obvious parallel of how trans women have to go on boymode to survive.

To finish this already too long tirade, I just want to add that the idea of Fiona's true form seems to be fluid. Had the hero of the story been a human peasant, she would probably still stay a pretty normative princess, even if he accepted her as an ogre, like a gender reversed Beauty and the Beast. I love that they didn't go for that ending.

#characters i project my transness on #princess fiona #shrek #transgender #trans #queer #I didn't even mention donkey #lord farquaad #far far away #rumplestiltskin #prince charming #fairy godmother #big bad wolf #Pinocchio #Ugly Stepsister #Shrek as a coming out movie #I think I spent too much time on this one

88 notes · View notes

spanishskulduggery · 3 years

Note

Hi! I'm very curious about something regarding the Spanish language. I'm currently studying A2 Spanish but I had this question and my teacher did not seem too willing to discuss it. Here it goes:

I know that Spanish has, something my Spanish teacher says, linguistic gender. I was wondering how do the people who don't align themselves with the gender binary (masculine and feminine) speak/write in it? I have read this article about Spanish speaking people from US adding "x" Or "@" and people from Argentina using "e" to make the words gender neutral.

Thank you so much for responding, whenever you get to it. Also love your blog. ❤

Short answer, in general speaking terms people are tending towards the -e now because the other two are very hard to actually speak, and because Spanish-speakers feel the -e is more authentic

What you're most likely to see in Spanish is masculine plural as the default, or in written things you might see todos y todas or like un/una alumno/a "a student", or like se busca empleado/a "employees wanted" / "looking for an employee"

If it's something official or academic you typically include both [todas y todas] or you go masculine plural [todos] unless it's specifically feminine plural

Related, linguistic gender applies to all things, not just people. Why is la mesa "table" feminine, but el libro "book" masculine? Just linguistic gender. I can tell you that most loanwords (that aren't people) in Spanish are masculine, and that there are certain words that come from Greek are masculine, and that -ista words are unisex most of the time... And I can tell you there are some words like testigo or modelo that are unisex and don't change for gender. Aside from that, speaking about nouns and grammatical gender... those particular things are harder to parse for regular people, but if you go into the field of linguistics you can explore that more deeply. Some of it is source language (i.e. "it came from Latin this way") or things like that. And in general when talking about nouns it's unimportant and not considered sexist, that's just how it is.

There is such a thing where it gets a little too far the other way and people will say "history? what about herstory" which is a nice thought but the etymology has nothing to do with gender there

When it comes to people - and when it comes to gendered attitudes - that's where it gets more confusing and more complicated.

I believe there was an experiment where people had French and Spanish speakers [I believe it was Spanish] try to identify how a "fork" would sound. French people gave it a more feminine voice because "fork" is feminine in French, while Spanish speakers gave it a more masculine voice because it's masculine in Spanish.

Whether we like it or not, certain gendered things do influence our thoughts and feelings and reactions. A similar thing in English exists where the old joke was something like "There was a car accident; a boy is rushed to the ER and the surgeon but the father was killed. When they got to the ER the doctor said 'I can't operate on him, he's my son!'" and it's like "well who could the doctor be?" ...and the doctor is his mother. We associate "doctor" as masculine and "nurse" as feminine.

There's a gender bias in our language thought patterns, even though the language changes. And that does exist in Spanish too, to different extents.

There are certain cultural and gendered stereotypes or connotations attached to certain words, many tend to be more despective or pejorative when it's women.

For example - and I know this has changed in many places or it isn't as prevalent - el jinete "horseman/rider", while the female form is la amazona "horsewoman/rider". Because la jinete or la jineta was sometimes "promiscuous woman".

There were also debates about things like la presidente vs. la presidenta or what the female version of juez should be, whether it should be la juez or la jueza

Most languages with gendered language have varying degrees of this, and all languages I'm aware of have gendered stereotypes related to professions or cultural attitudes in some way, and not just for women, and not all in the same way with some of them being very culturally based

The longer answer involves a bit of history, and I'll be honest, some of it is contested or considered a little controversial in Spanish-speaking countries particularly in the conservative parts (which honestly should come as no surprise)

The first symbol that I know of that came about was the X

First piece of contested history: As far as I know, it was the trans/queer and drag communities in Latin America who started the trend of X. When there were signs or bulletins that had the gendered endings - specifically masculine plural as the default plural - people would write a big X through the O. This was a way of being inclusive and also a very smash the patriarchy move.

Some people attribute this to women's rights activists which may also be true, but a good portion of the things I read from people say it was the trans/queer/drag communities in Latin America doing this.

I've also read it originated in Brazil with Portuguese; still Latin America, but not a Spanish-speaking country.

Where it's most contested is that some people will say that this trend started in the Hispanic communities of the United States. And - not without reason - people are upset that this is perceived as a very gringo movement.

That's why Latinx is considered a very American-Hispanic experience

The arroba (@) is relatively new. I remember seeing it in the 2000s. I don't know if it existed earlier for gender inclusivity.

People used it because it looks like a combination of O and A, so it was meant to be cut down on saying things like todos y todas or niños y niñas in informal written speech

I remember quite a few (informal) emails starting like hola tod@s or muy buenas a tod@s or things like that

I think of it more as convenience especially in the information age where you never knew who you were talking to and it's easier than including both words, especially when masculine plural might be clumsy or insensitive

Still, it's practically impossible to use the @ in spoken Spanish, so it's better for writing casually. You also likely won't be allowed to use the @ in anything academic, but in chatrooms, blogs, or forums it's an option

I love the E ending. And the gender neutral form in singular is elle... so it's él "he", ella "she", and elle "they (singular)"

The -e ending is I think became more common within the past 10 years though it might have existed longer than that. These sorts of changes tend to come from the queer or trans communities and tend to be more insular before becoming more of an outside thing that then the general population finds out about

It came about because there are some adjectives in Spanish that end in -e that are unisex. It's not an A, it's not an O, but it's something grammatically neutral for Spanish

It's not as awkward as X, and E exists very firmly in Spanish so it's not perceived as some outside (typically gringo) influence

The good news is, it's pretty widespread on the internet. Not so much in person (yet), but especially in Spain and Argentina at least from what I've seen, particularly in the queer communities and online culture.

The only issues with it are that for non-native speakers, you have to get used to any spelling changes. Like amigo and amiga, but to use the E ending you have to add a U... so it's amigue.

That's because there are certain words where you have to do spelling changes to preserve the sound; gue has a hard G sound like -go does [like guerra]... but ge has the equivalent of an English H sound [gelatina for example]. Another one is cómico/a "funny" which would go to cómique. Again, because co has a hard C/K sound, while ce is a soft sound more like an S or in some contexts TH/Z sound; like centro is a soft sound, while cola is a hard sound

Unless you make it to the preterite forms where you come across like pagué, alcancé, practiqué with those types of endings... or subjunctive forms, pague, alcance, practique ... Basically you'd have to be exposed to those spelling rules or you'd be really confused if you were a total beginner.

It all makes sense when you speak it, but spelling might be harder before you learn those rules

The other drawback is that the E endings are sometimes not applicable. Like in damas y caballeros "ladies and gentlemen" there's not really a gender neutral variation on that, it's all binary there. And while la caballero "female knight" does exist, you'd never see a male variation on dama; the closest I've ever seen is calling a guy a damisela en apuros "damsel in distress" in some contexts where the man needs rescuing, and it's feminine una/la damisela, and it's very tongue-in-cheek

There are also some contexts like jefe vs jefa where I guess you would say jefe for "boss" if you were going the neutral route, but it's a bit weird because it's also the masculine option.

I can't speak for how people might feel about those if they're non-binary or agender because every so often you kind of get forced into the binary whether you like it or not

I totally support the E, I just recognize there are some limitations there and it's quirks of the Spanish language itself

Important Note: Just to reiterate, E endings are the ones most Spanish-speakers prefer because it's easiest to speak and doesn't have the American connotation that X does in some circles

Where it gets very "Facebook comment section" is that you'll see many Latin Americans traditionalists and conservatives claim that "this is just the gringos colonizing our language" and "grammatical gender doesn't matter in Spanish". They'll say that the "gender movement" is an American feminist movement and that it's a gringo thing and doesn't reflect actual Latin Americans or Spanish-speakers

Which on the one hand, yes, English does have a lot of undue influence on other languages because of colonization, and American influence and meddling in Latin American politics is a big important issue

But as far as I'm aware of the X (and especially the E) were created by Latin Americans

The other issue I personally have is that any time this conversation comes up, someone will say something like somos latinOs and claim that masculine plural is gender neutral

To that I say, first of all, "masculine plural" is inherently gendered. Additionally, there is a gender neutral in Spanish but it's lo or ello and it's only used with "it" so it sounds very unfriendly to use on an actual person... and in plural it looks like masculine plural and everything applies like masculine plural

Second, the reason masculine plural is default is because of machismo. It's more important that we don't possibly misgender a man, so it has to be masculine plural. It's changed in some places, but growing up when I was learning Spanish, if it was 99 women and 1 man you still had to put masculine plural

I'm not opposed to there being a default, and I understand why it's easier to use masculine plural, but some people get very upset at the idea of inclusive language

...

In general, my biggest issues with these comments come when people act like non-binary/queer/trans people don't exist in Spanish-speaking countries, like English invented them somehow. So it's nice to see linguistic self-determination and seeing native speakers using the E endings.

103 notes · View notes

ineffable-endearments · 3 years

Text

CW below for a discussion that relates to homophobia, transphobia, queerphobia, acephobia, and related subjects. no specific stories, the themes just generally appear. i hope i didn't screw up and will fix it if i did.

so i was thinking about what makes Aziraphale and Crowley resonate as a queer love story, not just a "forbidden romance" (a trope that can be painfully cishet when it wants to be, which is often).

and i mean, obviously. there are a LOT of things. a lot. but something that didn't occur to me before is their relationship to each other relative to their sides.

at first, one would assume that they aren't supposed to be talking at all. this is probably true on a surface level. like, it's probably considered uncool to be caught chatting with The Enemy.

however, we do see that it's kind of normal for angels and demons to talk with a degree of civility. they don't trust each other deeply, that much is really obvious (Beelzebub says as much to Michael), and they do probably plan to kill each other eventually. at least, i think they genuinely believe that's how it's going to play out.

but! the front entrance to Heaven is in the same building as the front entrance to Hell! Aziraphale and Crowley literally walk into the building side by side! i know it's a funny joke, but Heaven and Hell aren't framed as stupid enough, by the end of the series, for that to be pure incompetence.

Michael has been in contact with Ligur for who-knows-how-long, feeding him information and presumably being fed information in return. Gabriel is entirely capable of speaking amicably with Beelzebub once it looks like their Plan isn't going through. and, of course, the Sides easily collaborate to punish Aziraphale and Crowley.

it's obviously normal for angels and demons to have a civil relationship of some sort.

a number of references are also made to the ways that the Sides are ultimately the same. Beelzebub and Gabriel are operating out of the same rulebook, after all; they both think the War is "written," they just differ on who's bound to win. to them, the most important thing is not even to thwart the other side on Earth - it's to get to the part where they're at war. they will absolutely collaborate with each other to reach that goal. they consider themselves part of the same Plan. consider even Crowley's thoughts in the book about how demons have "an unpopular job" but are "essential" to the running of the universe. they may be culturally different, but they all know they belong to the same society.

therefore, merely talking together is probably not strictly forbidden for Aziraphale and Crowley. even being sort of friendly probably isn't strictly forbidden. again, uncool? yeah. deadly? i doubt it, to be honest. heck, to their bosses' faces, they could use it as an excuse to spy on each other whether any actual spying got done.

what's the real problem? the thing everyone's upset about? it's not just that don't kill each other on sight. the real problem is that they prioritized each other. they got too intimate. their desires for a life together challenged the status quo, and even though they weren't the ones who were finally responsible for stopping the war altogether (that was Adam), they were blamed and sadistically punished for trying to preserve their relationship and their lives here on Earth instead of "growing up" and fulfilling their predetermined roles in Heaven and Hell.

in real life, society punishes people for prioritizing friendships in a way that most people assume is to be reserved only for romantic and sexual relationships. Heaven and Hell punish people for prioritizing friendship in a way that most people assume is to be reserved only for the glory of their cause.

and irl, when people are romantic or sexual (viewed as too intimate) with someone who is considered the "wrong gender," we punish them again for that. cisheteropatriarchal culture tends to expect men in particular to be not too intimate with each other and fuels a total hiding of emotion between them, although goodness knows women get pitted against each other and are expected to choose men over each other, too. also, the status quo does not know how to handle nonbinary people at all; the status quo gets angry if you even try to acknowledge that they exist. but if there was a widely-popular etiquette structure established for enbies, i'd be willing to bet it would also be a weird rivalry thing.

like, each gender sort of gets treated as "we all think the same in this gender, which is why we get along, but we don't like each other too much, because that would be gay."

"we're all looking to keep the Great Plan in motion, but we don't like each other too much, because then we wouldn't be on opposite sides."

basically, Aziraphale and Crowley read as a queer love story because their affection for each other and the lives they've created together challenges the traditional roles their shared society forces on them. it's a happy queer love story because not only do they manage to choose that affection over the status quo, they succeed and go on to enjoy themselves.

i'm a little nervous about posting this rant, because it's kind of saying, i guess, that Crowley and Aziraphale's queer relationship is characterized by their challenges to the status quo, and i don't think by any means that has to be true of all queer people. i mean, people can be quietly non-cishet, never let anyone know, never tell a soul, and they'd still not be cishet. and also, isn't the point that someday we'd get to a point where nobody has to deal with bigotry or even disrespect?

but at the same time, it is kind of impossible to look at the history and not see significant struggles, including ones that appear in stories over and over. i can't tell you how many posts i've seen on this site alone about how queer love and queer survival are themselves acts of resistance. and IMO, that's what Crowley and Aziraphale have.

39 notes · View notes

merlinmyrddin · 3 years

Note

Hello!

Can you recommend me some very underatted gay movies? (I prefer comdey or happy ones if it's possible)

I recently came to realize i am a 23 man who happens to be gay. I don't know what took me so long.

Hello! I am sorry for the time it took me to answer you, but your ask has been playing constantly in my head now for weeks and I had to go down nostalgia lane film-wise...!

I'm also sorry for how long this answer is, I got carried away!!!

So first of all, I am damn proud if you. I know it sounds like empty words but whether you're 13, 23, or 45, being able to say you have found your inner truth is always something to be proud of! And what took you so long? It didn't. We are living in times where people want you to believe you are meant to have your sexuality and/or gender figured out by 18 when in reality, I know more people doing their coming out in their 20's/30's. Because when it comes to being gay, lesbian, bi, trans and queer : this last decade has seen some major changes. But it's ok for people born late 80's and 90's to come out "just" now. We grew up in a time where homosexuality was still taboo in most places. And when I say taboo, I mean that "homosexual" was barely pronounced, sometimes only whispered. A time where "gay panic" was a legitimate defense in court. (Talking from a Western European point of view here again. Many places in the world, including the USA still consider the murder of an homosexual or transgender victim as a legitimate act. And these last years has proven that there was not only the "gay/trans panic" crippling our streets, but also a "black panic" and more recently, an "Asian panic". Short aparte here : "gay panic" doesnt mean "omg, that person is making me question my identity!?" nor is it a term used when thirsty over an actor/actress when openly gay such as "[actor name] oh wow...*gay panic intensifies*... this term is a serious concept a murderer can use in court as a defense when taking the life of someone from the community. This is the law enabling hate crimes.)

To any younger people reading this right now : gay marriage has been legal in France since 2013, in the UK since 2014 and, allegedly, in the US since 2015. This is recent history. People who are mid-20's are historically closer to the HIV/AIDs crisis than of the legalisation of same-sex marriage.

As such, we are made to believe than coming out in our twenties or thirties is doing a late coming out. No, it's not. We are a generation who suffered through systemic homophobia in our formative teenage years. When we were trying to figure who we were, people were marching in the streets calling us names, and trying to defend the idea we did not deserve basic humans rights. (As a side note, I am not implying that such issues are not currently happening. This is mostly western European centred again as I am, well, European. This is also targeted towards sexuality orientations, excluding any gender talks as this is still currently a very real societal issue for which the fight has only just begun. Double side note : I'm not yet fully caffeinated. But hopefully you get the general idea despite my flagrant lack of eloquence on this fine morning.)

Alright, let's move on to films then!

I searched for a long time for happy / comedic films but then I realised I was definitly not the right person to answer that. On a general basis, I enjoy dramas. That's my thing.

So instead, I thought I would list you the first LGBTQ+ Films I ever watched, hoping they'll find you well.

-Stonewall (1995). Not my favourite film, but as a kid, it was great first jump into lgbtq+ history. Sad note : The director of this film died of AIDS shortly after.

-Another country (1984) Based in the 1930's in a public school. Starring Rupert Everett (who just a few years ago came to direct "The Happy Prince", a great take on Oscar Wilde and Alfred Douglas, casting himself as Wilde, and Colin Morgan as Bosie...fantastic film, highly recommand), and starring Colin Firth. Teenagers discovering themselves, from homosexuality to politics. (The parralele made is quite interesting as both young men are misfits...one for being gay, one for being Marxist.) Great watch, but a heavy one.

-Maurice. (1987) God, I love this film. It explores not only coming to term with your sexuality but also what it means to be homosexual for the people around you and the impact it can have on your life, depending on your social background. Starring James Wilby, Hugh Grant and Rupert Graves, this is an other drama which leaves you feeling almost raw. I always had an affinity for British film because of how...real they feel. Best example would probably be Danny Boyle himself. You know what I mean... you grow attached and you feel for these characters. And Maurice does just that. Memorable quote : I am an unspeakable of the Oscar Wilde sort. (And you might think : "Oscar Wilde? Again??" And oh boy, yes. Oscar Wilde again. Yes, he is one of the most well known author, mostly because of The Picture of Dorian Gray, but he is also a major part of Queer history. After all, "queer" has been used as a derogatory term for homosexuals for the time...directed at Wilde during his trial for posing as a somdomite. (No typo there.) Being an unspeakable of the Oscar Wilde sort is an other one of the euphemism like "being a friend of Dorothy") And talking about Wilde...

-Wilde (1997). Biopic, Stephen Fry as Oscar, Jude law as Oscar's lover : Bosie. Incredible. Superb film. I can not find words.

-An Englishman in New-York (not the Sting song. Actually yes, kinda the Sting song. Because both the film and the song are about the same man : Quentin Crisp). Biopic. An artist, writer, actor, Quentin Crisp has always bothered. Painting his nails, wearing make up, criticising the royal family. He was a character. John hurt is magnificent as Crisp, who he had already played in 1975 in The Naked Civil Servant, an other great watch.

- A Single Man (2009). With Nicholas Hoult and Colin Firth. This film was a slap in my face. And it has, in my opinion, one of the greatest speech of all time, during a scene in the classroom :

"[...]Let's leave the Jews out of this just for a moment. Let's think of another minority. One that... One that can go unnoticed if it needs to. There are all sorts of minorities, blondes for example... Or people with freckles. But a minority is only thought of as one when it constitutes some kind of threat to the majority. A real threat or an imagined one. And therein lies the fear. If the minority is somehow invisible, then the fear is much greater. That fear is why the minority is persecuted. So, you see there always is a cause. The cause is fear. Minorities are just people. People like us."

-Pride (2014). [TRAILER] Bloody hell, that film. When we talk about lgbtq+ history, we often thing about the pink triangle and the holocaust, Reagan, Stonewall, AIDS and... fucking Maggie. Margaret Thatcher, the Iron Lady. Again, funny how the past is closer than we think, as I still have friends of mine talking to me about that period in British history that they lived through. The minors strike. The poverty, the crisis of the working class and the HIV crisis. But if you are looking for a film full of hope, from tears to laughter, this is the one. Bread and Roses. Bread, and Roses. And a message, which I believe is the essence of our community to this day : solidarity forever. After all...there is power in a union.

If anybody has other films to add, you are more than welcome to do so.

Love you all xx

28 notes · View notes

hellomynameisbisexual · 3 years

Text

Most people know to anticipate some degree of change when they’re in a committed, long-term romantic relationship: a desire for more nights in with Netflix instead of drunken ragers on the dance floor; the inevitable shift of physical appearances; the unexpected transformation of a side gig into a career. But many people assume sexual orientation is fairly stable—that whether you’re gay or straight, you’re “born this way,” and that’s what you’ll be forever.

That definitely isn’t always the case. But even though coming out as queer or bisexual in a committed straight relationship isn’t unheard of, a change in sexual identity is not something that many people anticipate happening within a long-term partnership, nor is it widely discussed. Despite the advancements in broader social understanding of LGBTQ issues made in the past decade, therapists Jared Anderson and Tamala Poljak told VICE that many of their patients fear that being bi or queer when straight-partnered could doom their relationship. There’s also a pervasive idea that a person in a hetero relationship can’t be LGBTQ because they have chosen to commit, and are presumably attracted to, a member of the opposite sex. But bisexuality is a valid orientation, and while it may feel intimidating to embrace this discovery and stay hetero-partnered, it’s by no means impossible.

“I believe both gender and sexuality [are] fluid, meaning we change throughout a lifespan,” Poljak said, adding that recent cultural shifts have likely led to light bulb moments for some individuals who has been denying or simply not recognizing their queer feelings.

Sexuality doula Isabella Frappier, whose work includes helping clients own and define their sexual expression, said that a person doesn’t need to have acted on any same-sex-attracted feelings in order to label themselves as queer or bisexual, and that bisexuality can be explored while still honoring an extant relationship, especially since everyone has different definitions of what it means to explore.

Bisexuality is often dismissed as a phase, and the idea that bisexual people are "just confused" persists. This is especially true for men; while bisexuality among women is slightly more socially acceptable (albeit because it’s fetishized and often viewed as an "experiment"), men often have to contend with the belief that bisexuality, as Carrie once put it on Sex and the City, is “a pit stop on the way to gay town.”

These myths stem from our society’s historically rigid approach to sexual expression. Experts are adamant that a person's bisexuality does not invalidate the love they have for their opposite-sex partner. According to Poljak, an associate marriage and family therapist, the idea that a person needs to “pick a side” is a rooted in heteronormative expectations.

The question, “Am I queer or bi enough?” can also weigh heavily on people who think they might not be all the way straight, as though there is a certain amount of "proof" that could confirm their sexuality. As much as those questioning might like to think there’s a litmus test that will tell them whether or not they’re truly bi, that’s simply not the case.

“For queer folks, it just isn’t so cut and dry,” Poljak said. “The hope to ‘figure it out’ and/or find ‘an answer’ is a pretty rigid idea steeped in heteronormative expectations. It also puts a lot of pressure on a person to have to declare one thing and stick to it. If you know you are attracted to one or more genders, then it’s really that simple.”

A journey into one’s queerness doesn’t have to involve sex outside of the relationship, or even sex in general. Just noticing that you’re attracted to other genders can be the extent of this exploration. The act of coming out to yourself, or maybe saying, “I’m bi. I don’t know what that looks like yet, and that’s OK,” has the potential to be extremely affirming.

You might find comfort in connecting with other queer folks, especially since identifying as queer might otherwise make you feel vulnerable or isolated. Some people are validated by coming out to friends and family, or by getting involved with the queer community. Frappier encouraged people exploring their bi/queer identity to go to LGBTQ events, read books about sexuality or written by queer authors, support bisexual artists and musicians, or join queer groups. Online, Reddit’s r/bisexual subreddit is a funny and informative space for bi folks to ask questions or simply discuss their experiences, while the Fluid Arizona resource page and Autostraddle's events and meet-ups can help queer folks build an IRL community.

If you decide you want to connect more physically with your queer sexual desires, but aren’t sure where to begin, start small. “I’d first encourage a person in this situation to start by considering the multiple ways they can explore their queerness on their own,” Frappier said. “That can be through watching ethical same-sex porn, or writing your own erotica.”

Experts strongly encouraged discussing your queerness with your partner eventually, as the secrecy can ultimately strain the relationship. (It can also contribute to the harmful idea that your queerness is somehow scandalous, or something to be ashamed of.) If you’re worried that your partner will react poorly, or you aren’t ready to share your feelings with them yet, consider talking to a professional, a trusted friend or loved one, or a queer friend who may relate a bit to what you are going through. Poljak, who is trained as an LGBTQ-affirmative therapist, said it’s crucial for people questioning their sexuality to have a solid support system. Studies show that bisexual people are at a higher risk of depression, anxiety, and experiencing violence than their gay, lesbian, and heterosexual counterparts. While staying in the closet can be a necessary choice for a myriad of reasons, research shows that the stress of concealment contributes to disrupted relationships, feelings of shame and guilt, and symptoms of anxiety and depression.

If you feel ready to talk with your significant other, avoid starting the conversation when either of you are tired or distracted, in the middle of a fight, or in any situation where tensions are high. Instead, choose a time when you both feel relaxed and won’t be rushed, like over coffee on a Saturday morning.

You don’t have to have everything figured out before you talk to your partner. Frappier said that it’s perfectly fine to tell them you’re in a questioning, exploratory phase, and then communicate what you’d like that to look like. There’s no need to choose a label unless you’d like to.

“Explain to [your partner] how you’ve been feeling, what you’re desiring to explore, and how you imagine that could look within your relationship,” Frappier said. She advised that it’s wise to let your partner know that your sexual expression is not a reflection of the relationship, but more about exploring a new part of yourself.

“Once you’re finished speaking, it’s important to give them space to share, and to really listen to how they are feeling,” Frappier said. “They may take it in stride, or need a little time to process it.”

Don’t stress if the first conversation doesn’t go as well as you’d hoped; this will likely be the first of many discussions. Anderson, who specializes in trauma and relationships, said that if any of these conversations get heated or overly emotional, it’s a good idea to press pause and revisit the topic once both partners have had a chance to cool off.

Couples therapy can also be extremely beneficial. “Ideally, both the person coming out and the partner of that person would be in individual therapy with a therapist who is trained in LGBTQ-affirmative therapy,” Poljak said. “The same is true if [you're] deciding to open your marriage, explore polyamory or emotional monogamy, and/or redefine your marital contract. The therapist needs to have more than just general knowledge of alternative, queer lifestyles, and understand the multiple systems at play.”

Psychology Today is the most thorough national network for finding mental health professionals, and allows users to search using various classifications, including sexuality and type of therapy (the “compassion-based” and “culturally sensitive” filters are good options for LGTBQ folks). Some health insurance plans allow users to filter for therapists who specialize in LGBTQ issues when searching for in-network providers. For POC-specific options, the National Queer and and Trans Therapists of Color Network is a good resource. For those struggling to find an in-person therapist, Pride Counseling offers digital therapy sessions via phone, messaging, and video call.

After your initial conversations and once you've sought any additional support you might find helpful, you and your partner may want to formulate an action plan. If you want to include your partner in your sexual exploration (and they are comfortable with that), the plan might include attending queer events, watching queer porn together, role-playing, engaging in threesomes, and/or swinging. If you’d prefer to explore your sexuality without your partner, but with other people, you may need to discuss opening up your relationship.

“Some folks find it exciting or even sexy, and perhaps a discussion unfolds about opening up the marriage or exploring poly or engaging in new kinds of play and fantasy with their partners,” Poljak said. “Maybe it even inspires their partner to share with honesty some queerness of their own that is emerging. Ideally, there is space for people’s differences and otherness to be expressed without having to lose the relationship, or having to abandon or sacrifice yourself.”

This sort of exploration is not one-size-fits-all. Regardless of the route you take, Frappier stresses the importance of discussing boundaries and safety throughout. If the two of you are struggling to find some sort of consensus when it comes to boundaries, that doesn’t mean the discussion regarding exploration is over forever. It’s very common for couples to have multiple conversations surrounding this topic, especially if one partner is asking to renegotiate the marital contract in some way.

Just as it’s reasonable for a person to want to explore their burgeoning sexuality outside of the relationship, it’s also reasonable for the other partner to say, “I’m not cool with that.” In some instances, it might be in the interest of both individuals to go their separate ways… and that’s OK, too.

“A marriage is a partnership that lasts as long as it’s right,” writer Nadia Rawls said after coming out to, and, later, ending things with her now–ex-husband. Rawls said she tried to make it work with her husband for six months, but ultimately realized that separating was the best option. “It takes a hell of a partner to help their spouse grow into the person they really are,” Rawls wrote. “Even if that means losing them.”

Rawls’s story is just one of many—Frappier and Poljak said that many couples make it work, too. It’s hard to predict how your partner might react, or how you’ll feel or what you’ll want, once you start exploring your queerness or bisexuality. That uncertainty is part of what makes the process of coming out in a straight relationship so intimidating. But the reward of being honest—both with yourself and with your partner—is the gift of a more authentic life. Regardless of the outcome, that is worth pursuing.

29 notes · View notes

tuiyla · 2 years

Note

Hi,

So I'm not invested in Klaine but I have found some comments here and there on how heteronormativity played a role in their relationship dynamic. Some things like: making Kurt conveniently more fragile in order to make Blaine protect him, give him the traditionally female roles in some situations and Blaine the male one.

And I think is interesting because it's so ambiguous and I kind of can see both sides. We know Glee broke stereotypes at the time by making Kurt have traditionally feminine interests (I think it's totally unfair to dismiss that as him being a stereotypical gay) but he shouldn't be the one in the "passive" role, if that makes sense. But was it a problem of the show or in universe? Because they seemed to be self aware of this potential perception at times and they did varied this dynamic - which made ppl start to see Blaine as stereotypical in later seasons, funny enough.

Thoughts?

Hey!

I'm blanking on examples of what you're saying, especially the fragility-protection thing but maybe others more well-versed in the Klaine story can chime in? Please, really do feel free to. I am however so down to talk about in and out of universe perspectives and how gender roles and dynamics affect even - or particularly - the queer relationships. So down!

Because they seemed to be self aware of this potential perception at times and they did varied this dynamic - which made ppl start to see Blaine as stereotypical in later seasons, funny enough.

Could you please elaborate on this? Again I'm blanking on examples and I'm not that well-informed on fan perceptions, to be honest. Most of what I know about how the fans view these kinds of things is based on reddit and I don't know how representative that viewpoint was of fandom as a whole.

But just to say in this first round of the discussion, I have many, many thoughts on how Kurt's femininity and him being perceived as a stereotypical gay guy is handled in the fandom. I have a draft for an essay all about this but god, when will it write itself? Long story short, I find it infuriating when people call him a "walking gay stereotype" and fail to a) contextualize his story in the atmosphere of 2009/the early 2010s and b) realize that part of representations goal is to be able to have all kinds of queer identities on screen. So even if Kurt does start out as a bit of an exaggeration because of early Glee's satirical nature, you're so right that it's unfair, frankly just bonkers to dismiss him because of those ~stereotypical~ traits. A lot of it boils down to effeminophobia and this more general fear of playing into stereotypes which, phew, this is why this is a bigger topic lol I could go on and on about this.

I'm digressing too much, the point about Kurt is that his femininity or traits that are traditionally perceived as feminine are good, actually. But to your point about Klaine, I can sort of see how people would say that about their dynamic and apply gender roles/heterenormativity. I can't think of loads of examples but there are some where the two were split into "girls and boys" categories and Kurt fell into the former. And am I mistaken, or there are a fair few instances in season 3 where Blaine is one of the boys (The Rain in Spain comes to mind) where Kurt is absent for one reason or another? I think Glee established Kurt as someone who feels more comfortable with the girls early on (and again this is its own topic) but then it also just, sort of by default, had Blaine hang with the guys in ~bro~ scenes and ND boys performances. And there is something to be explored there in regards to their relationship and how heteronormativity applies, in a sense that oh, this binary is established, but I think for the most part it's just Glee doing its thing and not thinking too deeply about it.

The beauty of queer stories is that they're inherently transgressive so Klaine is never going to fit into a heteronormative lens, but I think you are right in that it's interesting to explore how it still affects them because of the society we live in. And like you say, both in-universe and out. Again I can't actually think of examples when Kurt was in that more passive, traditionally feminine role and Blaine as the more masculine one but I think if we were to call it a problem, it'd be an out of universe one. I don't think Kurt and Blaine ever felt like they were inadvertently adhering to gender roles, like, it wasn't like Kurt took on a more passive role so he can be saved and Blaine a more active one so he can be a knight in shining blazer.

And that reminds me, the only example that really comes to mind is of course the very beginning with Blaine encouraging Kurt and helping with the Karofsky situation. But I don't think that situation is particularly gendered like this and Blaine's way of helping Kurt is far from being the toxic masculinity bs we usually get from other Glee boys. That's not to say gender dynamics aren't present and aren't worth exploring, but if what you're saying Anon is that the fandom thinks they fall into heteronormative gender roles... I disagree. I think their dynamic is refreshingly queer in that it doesn't fit neatly into that but it's certainly telling when people try to make it do that. And when Glee defaults to things like Blaine being one of the guys, of course.

Wow this is a right mess but I hope I could articulate some of my thoughts and please, you or others do continue this discussion. Always good to be critical of how heteronormativity impacts stories and specifically queer stories, both in how they're made and how they're interpreted.

#glee asks #klaine asks #making it its own thing just in case #kurt hummel #blaine anderson #i am so sorry if I'm less coherent than usual i need to go to bed #but i didn't want to keep you waiting anon and make you think i wasn't gonan reply #anon #flashed back to the feudal lord and handmaiden debacle ngl #i'm sorry i don't have the bandwidth to make more sense lol #kurt asks

5 notes · View notes

misterbitches · 3 years

Text

hi @yeedak thank you so m uch for replying with what you did. YAY ADHD!!!!! ur partner sounds like she rocks >:) as do u

i found it really illuminating and i agree with all of it. and god as much as i understand reticence when black people are interracially dating (it is so hard) i also hate it when people dictate it and also to a degree that it makes it extremely uncomfortable for the person themselves. to me it really is about a sense of control particularly if you are a woman. constantly trying to pick someone’s life partner for them instead of letting them find out if it’s a) something they want or even want to do b) something they can handle and c) their experience. it can purely cultural as well. my mom is a black american but my father is nigerian and that was basically a sin. however my father’s siblings? the women who had to marry extremely quickly and had to be with nigerian men or at the very least african? divorced. because they had to clamor for love for approval, pop out babies, and look what that got them. i totally understand you and your mother. and you’re right about all of it.

the idea of a man whore is so funny to me too because it’s not about sexual liberation it’s literally about them wanting to use people as disposable which is why sexual liberation for women as well can be confusing. but all of this isn’t so we can develop our own imaginations and find out our own inhibitions. like you said in all of it and i found this part very very interesting and true, “youth is for sex and no mention of asexuality.” when you get older you are not sexual, when you are a child you are unsure about it, but there’s a time in our lives where we shouldn’t waste it, where it’s only acceptable in that window, where it’s dictated. tangentially i think it’s very funny that the people we sleep with also become a point of pride. let’s say if he is a man (as a bisexual~**~ gorl) but he’s ugly, i should be ashamed, too?

so much boxing in and pushing and dictating. they really are here to spread a message. and i know things ar ehard. i can believe people ask you that but it’s still so.....weird? i remember saying something about my sexuality once and it’s not like i knew the people but then they started asking me questions and i honestly felt embarrassed and like an outsider. i dunno.

and your analogy of a mirror was perfect woaaaaaaah that’s what im gonna say now thank you so much credit to you. gENIUS!!! as real life changes, what we see changes. but media doesnt come first.

also totally agree about watching what people consume and not falling into those patterns. and when “bad” things are shown i do not understand why shows are so scared to show them as they are or not romanticize. a real issue to introduce when it comes to age gaps would be why it is frequent in the lgbtq+ community. that is a real thing because when you have to hide yourself of course you can be stuck in a state of arrested development and trying to re-establish times you may never have. that’s a geniuine fear and concern, it’s understandable even if i don’t particularly care for it, but it’s like for these writeres there’s no reason to look deeply or put that into their story. so why are they doing it? and what is the message here? uGH. and what ur mother said makes so much sense we are just constantly absorbing all these messages and culture absolutely aids to it and you’re right about the generations. and sometimes things stop and start but i genuinely think (and know) that for us to continue forward and not have the constant backwards taht means we have to push to get there and demand and that also means we have to make an effort to end the harm we then see on screen. rape culture dictates these shows. it relies on it. it is disgusting but rape culture is the norm, the norm is the oppression so we have to attack it otherwise it sticks and htat’s exactly why we see what we see.

and the unacceptability of gender fluidity is what keeps the genre SO INFLEXIBLE sincerely. it honestly just pulls so heavily from patriarchy and the roles in which we have to follow to uphold that structure.

it’s really just not enough to show us things any more wihtout taking it into consideration. and like ive mentioned there’s soooooooooo much media that has a lot to say that embeds itself. there’s this thing my friend linked me to on re-examining queerness in korean cinema (much like my dad’s country; patriarchal, more “conservative, anti lgbtq+, reliant on capital. africa is different because of the blackness component but the structures aided by colonialism absolutely remain and continue and that’s how we see such similarities. thse countries are more “overt” in this output but still you know. america. sucks) because we are trying to re-evaluate what it means to be heard and seen. the different ways and sort of the message that a lot of us as lgbtq+ can feel. you know, how we can get a feeling on if a person has our same experience, how we kind of have to learn to identify that. not sure if this makes sense...

your mom sounds really cool. and i’m fucking sorry. so many men do that. i live with both my parents but even then i see this power imbalance i can’t stand and you know i would have believed it was normal if i wasnt able to learn aand had to build up thinking skills. there was one day that it hit me that there are parts of my parents relationship i abhor, that are imbalanced, that make me find my father disgusting and make me ashamed of my mother. i don’t want that to happen to me or my potential children. if i have a male partner for life, which i am sure i will because offffffff heteronormativity and homophobia and being half black american half nigerian, he cannot recreate that. i am optimistic on what people can do without needing such grand structures or the support of the elite etc you know? that’s how we know there’s good work that exists and people we can find that arent with the status quou!!!

and who want a better world. we have to know we can rally that together. i think part of that is constant demanding of things to do better. there’s a rage against the machine song called settle for nothing and it’s about 0 compromise. there’s a famous quote i dont remember by who that’s basically like there’s an idea that there’s a limit to asking for dignity and what you deserve because when people realize they can live better lives they want to cultivate that more and more but that means a loss of control and a sharing of power from the top. nothing is ever enough if it can be better and we are allowed to demand it (or take it.) we deserve the world, we are being told that we’re asking fo rtoo much. are we? really?

i was thinking about the children thing as well bc...lmao i was so tightly contorlled as a child and it really messed me up but at the same time, like you, i honestly do not want my children watching drivel. like even with youtube. a friend of mine said that what she thinks she will do is try and hammer home how fantastical these things are, they do not reflect reality, and to get them to understand the spectacle. at the same time i’m like does a child really need to watch these dumb tiktok stars or jake paul? but then im like i really dont want to control them. but like what if ur kid asks u to go to some like fucking BL concert or some shit like what do you say to that?!??! I DONT WANNA SAY NO BUT AT THE SAME TIME UHHHHlmao but at the same time we have to give them tools to analyze and do the right things and follow their hearts

however,

as you know

LOL

tysm for responding, lovely talking to you and hearing your thoughts!!!

oh btw so u r from kashmar? that is very cool......VERY COOL

17 notes · View notes

maggiecheungs · 2 years

Note

hi, i’m the same anon again. Ur descriptions of ur favorite films were lovely! And u mentioned ur favorite directors a lot in there and so now i have a new question. Who are your favorite directors and why?

hiiiiii im glad my rambling didn’t bore you 😳👉👈 i’ve actually discovered two new absolute favourite directors this year (both thai): anucha boonyawatana (who directed malila) and ter nawapol (who directed mary is happy, mary is happy). both of them are absolutely incredible directors and i would definitely recommend checking out their work!

anucha boonyawatana has only made a few films, but they are always so distinctive. they tend focus on queer relationships, and lean quite heavily on buddhist themes of transience and human connection. they’re also visually stunning, though admittedly quite strange (and don’t go into them expecting an unambiguously happy ending). to me, her films feel incredibly cathartic—i always feel interestingly hollow when i finish them (but not necessarily in a bad way!). and while she’s only got three full films, she’s also directed a few tv series, including the currently airing not me :)

ter nawapol films are usually incredibly innovative in both form and content—for example, mary is happy is adapted from an actual teenager’s twitter feed, and die tomorrow is just a collection of unconnected vignettes about people’s last days on earth. he excels at taking incredibly mundane objects or topics and forcing you to reconsider how you look at them (happy old year is literally a two hour film about a woman decluttering her home, but he uses her relationship with the random objects she throws out as a lens to examine her relationships with everyone around her, and with herself). his films a can also be very funny, in a unique sort of way—he has a sense of humour that teeters between ‘dark’, ‘deadpan’ and ‘snarky’, which stops his films from ever getting too bleak. it’s a very millennial sense of humour, i think, which is fitting considering most of his films are about Struggling Millennials lmao

+ bonus kunihiko ikuhara, bc i think i mentioned him too: he might be cheating bc most of the things he’s directed are anime series, not films, but shhhhhh. he specialises in portraying queer adolescence through layers of dense metaphor and symbolism, which some people hate but which i loveeeeee

some other directors i love: wong kar wai (king of yearning and Atmosphere), ang lee (can direct a martial arts masterpiece and a british period drama equally well), elgar shengelaia (surreal soviet satirist), hayao miyazaki (i love everything studio ghibli produces but particularly his films), leontine sagan (she directed mädchen in uniform 1931, she’s kind of a legend), apichatpong weerasethakul (THE arty thai director, very very strange films but after about half an hour you enter an incredibly receptive trance state and start to have fun), isao takahata (another ghibli director <3), pen ek ratanaruang (his films tend to become cult classics and for good reason), levan akin (he directed and then we danced, which absolutely blew my socks off), zero chou (lesbian taiwanese director working with themes of gender and sexuality, she’s awesome), definitely some more but i’ve been working all day and my brain is mush lmao

#ask response #film anon #can you tell i really love thai cinema? bc i really love thai cinema lmao #i hadn’t watched much before this year but according to mdl i’ve watched. a Lot in the last six months #but p’nuchie and nawapol are my favourites <3 #anonymous #movie tag #okay now i’m curious about you 👀 do you have any particular favourite directors or films

2 notes · View notes

adorpheus · 3 years

Text

on fujoshi and fetishization

Lately, more and more, both here on tumblr and on other sites, I keep seeing people spew unfiltered hatred at fujoshi - that is, women who like mlm content such as gay fanfic and fanart featuring men with other men. And I don’t mean like a specific type of fujoshi, like the ones who are genuinely being weird about it, but just like a general hatred for girls (but especially straight identifying girls) who express love for gay romance.

I hate to break this to you all, but women (including straight women!) actually are allowed to like mlm fanfiction and fanart, even enthusiastically so. A woman simply expressing her love of gay fanfic, even if it is in kind of a cringey way or a way that you personally don’t like, is NOT automatically fetishization.

I’ve been on the receiving end of fetishization for my entire life, from a very young age, as many black and brown folx have, so I consider myself pretty well acquainted with how it works. Fetishization isn’t just like, being really into drawings of boys kissing, or whatever the fuck y’all are trying to imply on this god forsaken site.

Fetishization is complicated imo, and can encompass a lot of things, such as (but not limited to):

1 - dehumanization, e.g. viewing a group of people as sexual objects who exist purely for entertainment purposes, rather than acknowledging them as actual people who deserve respect and rights

and

2 - projecting certain assumptions onto said people based on their race/sexuality/whatever is being fetishized. These assumptions are often, but not always, sexual in nature (like the idea that black people in general are more sexual than other races, etc etc etc).

I’m going to use myself as an example to illustrate my point. Please note this isn’t the best or most nuanced example, but it is the most simplistic. A white person finding me attractive and respectfully appreciating my black features as part of what makes me beautiful is not, on its own, fetishization. A white person finding me attractive solely or mostly because I’m a PoC is now in fetishization territory. Similarly, assuming I’m dominant because of my blackness (like saying “step on me mommy” and shit like that) is hella fetishistic.

That being said, theres definitely a difference between how fetishization works in real life with real people, and how it shows up in fandom.

Fetishization manifests in many different ways in fandom, but most commonly on the mlm side of things, I personally see it appear as conservative (or centrist) women who love the idea of two men together, but don’t actually like gay people, and don’t necessarily think LGBT+ people deserve rights (or “special treatment” as its sometimes dog whistled). These women view queer men as sexual objects for entertainment rather than an actual group of people who deserve to be protected from systemic oppression. I’ve noticed that they often don’t even think of the men they “ship” together as actually being gay, and may even express disgust at the idea of a character in an mlm ship being headcanon’d gay. In case its not obvious, this is pretty much exactly the same way a lot of cishet men fetishize lesbians (they see “lesbian” as a porn category, rather than like, what actual LGBT people think of when we read the word lesbian). There’s a pretty popular viral tweet thread going around where someone explains seeing this trend of conservative women who like mlm stuff, and I have also personally witnessed this phenomenon myself in more than one fandom.

The funny thing is, maybe its just me buuuut.... The place I see this particular kind of fetishization happen most is not in the anime/BL fandom, from which the term fujoshi originates - I actually see these type of women way way more in western fandom spaces like Supernatural, Harry Potter, and Hannibal. I can’t stress this enough, there’s a shocking amount of people who are like, straight up trump supporters in these fandoms. If you want to experience it, try joining a Hannigram or Destiel group on facebook and you will probably encounter one eventually especially if you happen to be living through a major historical event. Like these women probably wouldn’t even be considered “fujoshi”, because that term doesn’t really apply to them given they aren’t in the BL/anime fandom, yet they’re the ones I personally see actually doing the most harm.

Of course this isn’t the ONLY kind of fetishizing woman in the mlm/BL world, there are other ways fetishization shows up, but this is the most toxic kind that I see.

A girl just being really into BL or whatever may be “cringe” to you, or she may be expressing her love for BL in a “cringey” way, but a straight woman really enjoying BL is not, on its own, somehow inherently fetishization. Yes, sometimes teenage girls act kind of cringe about how much they like BL and that might be annoying to you, but its not necessarily ~problematic~.

That being said, IT NEEDS BE REMARKED that a lot of the “fujoshi” that you all hate so deeply, are actually closeted trans men or nonbinary people who haven’t yet come to terms with their gender identity, or are otherwise just NOT cishet. I know because I was one of these closeted people for years, and I honestly think tumblr and the cultural obsession around purity is one of the many reasons I was closeted so deeply for so long. STORYTIME LOL!!! In my early adolescence, I was a sort of proto “fujoshi”. I identified as a bi girl who was mostly attracted to men, or as most (biphobic) people called it, “practically straight”. I wrote and read “slash” fanfic and looked at as well as drew my own fanart. We didn’t use the term fujoshi back then, but that’s definitely how I could have been described. I was obsessed with yaoi, BL, whatever you want to call it, to a cringe-inducing degree. I really struggled to relate to most het romances, so when I first discovered yaoi fanfics (as we called them at the time), I fell in love and felt like I finally found the type of romance content that was made for me. I didn’t know exactly why, I just knew it hit different. LGBT+ fanart and fanfiction brought me an immense amount of joy, and I didn’t really think too hard about why.

At some point, in my early 20s, after reading lots of discourse™ here on tumblr and other places like twitter, I started to get the sinking feeling that my passion for gay fanfiction was ~problematic~. I had always felt a sense of guilt for being into mlm content, because literally anyone who found out I liked BL (especially the men I dated) shamed me for liking it all the fucking time (which btw is literally just homophobic, like can we talk about that?). In addition to THAT bullshit, now I’m seeing posts telling me that girls who like BL are cringey gross fetishists who inspire rage and should go die?

Let me tell you, I internalized the fuck out of messages like this. I desperately wanted to avoid being ~problematic~. At the time, I thought being problematic was like the worst thing you could be. I was terrified of being “cancelled”, before canceling was even really a thing. I thought to myself, “oh my god, I’m gross for liking this stuff? I should stop.” I beat myself up over this. I wanted so badly to be accepted, and to be deemed a Good Person by the internet and society at large.

I tried to shape up and become a good ally (lmfao). I stopped writing fanfic and deleted all the ones I was working on at the time. I made a concerted effort to assimilate into cishet culture, including trying to indulge myself more deeply in the few fandoms I could find that had het content I did enjoy (Buffy, True Blood, Pretty Little Liars, etc). I would occasionally look at BL/fanfic/etc in private, but then I would repress my interest in it and not look for a while. Instead I would look at women in straight relationships, and create extremely heterosexual Couple Goals pinterest boards, and try to figure out how I could become more like these women, so I, too, could be loved someday.

This cycle of repression lasted like eight years. Throughout it all, I was performing womanhood to the best of my ability and trying to become a woman that was worthy of being in a relationship. I went in and out of several “straight” relationships, wondering why they didn’t make me feel the way reading fanfic did. Most of all, I couldn’t figure out why straight intimacy didn’t work for me. I just didn’t enjoy it. I always preferred looking at or making gay fanfiction/fanart over actual intimacy with men in real life.

Eventually, I stumbled upon a trans coming out video that someone I was following posted online, my egg started to crack, and to make an extremely long story short, after like 3 years of introspection and many gender panic attacks that I still experience to this day, I realized that I’m uh... MAYBE... NOT CIS..!? :|

I truly believe if I had just been ALLOWED TO LIKE GAY STUFF WITHOUT BEING SHAMED FOR IT, I probably would have realized I was trans way way sooner. Because for me, indulging in my love of gay romance and writing gay fanfic wasn’t me being a weirdo fetishist, it was actually me exploring my own gender identity. It is what helped me come to terms with being a nonbinary trans boy.

Not everyone realizes they are trans at age 2 or whatever the fuck. Sometimes you have to go through a cringey fujoshi phase and multiple existential crises to realize how fucking gay you are AND THATS FINE.

And one more thing - can we just be real here?

A lot of anti-fujoshi sentiment is literally just misogyny. omg please realize this. Its “women aren’t allowed to enjoy things” but, like... with gay fanfics. Some of the anti-fujoshi posts I see come across my dash are clearly ppl projecting a caricature they invented in their head of a demonic fujoshi fetishist onto any woman who expresses what they consider to be a little too much enthusiasm for gay content and then using their perception of that individual as an excuse to justify their disdain for any women, especially straight women, ‘invading’ their ~oh so exclusive~ queer fandom spaces.

god get over yrselfs this is gatekeeping by another name

idk why i spent so long writing this no one is even going to read it, does anyone even still use this site

*EDIT: HOLY SHIT WHEN DOING RESEARCH FOR THIS POST I FOUND OUT THAT Y-GALLERY IS BACK OMG!!!

#rant #fujoshi #I SAID WHAT I SAID #personal #gender stuff

28 notes · View notes

arospectips · 3 years

Note

first of all thank you for all that y’all do!! i’ve sent in,,, a lot,,, and y’all have been so helpful and nice so thank you so much!! :))) this will be ~long~ so strap in. the bullet points make it look longer than it is but i figure it’s easier to read that way? idk. anyway i thought i was arospec and now i’m thinking i may be full aro? i know no one else can tell “diagnose” me or anything but i was hoping to get some perspective. so i’m just gonna put down all my thoughts and hope i haven’t forgotten anything.

- my first “crush” was in preschool

- i’ve had a lot of “crushes,” more than anyone else i’ve met, and none have lasted very long (at most until i stopped seeing them regularly)

- for the duration of these “crushes,” i could never really sort out my feelings and would eventually just accept it was romantic in order to stop thinking about it

- i’ve always thought of crushes as a fun thing, more of something i could choose rather than something that chose me (“this person is attractive and funny, do i have a crush on them? yes. no. probably. yeah, sure.” rather than “ahh i’m blushing and this attractive person made me laugh oh god do i like them?”)

- my “crushes” tended to be cute guys who were nice/funny or a close girl friend

- it never occurred to me to date these people until other people around me started dating

- when i was homeschooled for one year, 6th grade, i was mainly isolated (by choice/circumstance—as in nobody forced me to be alone or anything. my parents are great and cool) and didnt think about/yearn for a romantic relationship

- i began to question if i was acespec and found i am uncomfortable being described as “biromantic”

- i can easily imagine characters in romantic relationships but it is very difficult to imagine myself in one

- i “dated” a guy for about two weeks and was not comfortable when he would be *oogie*

- my favorite part of romance is the closeness, the idea of being committed to another person—everything that could also be construed as romance

- when characters are being particularly romantic (i.e. wedding vows, etc.) i get uncomfortable or skeptical, something i assumed everyone did because it seems so unrealistic

- for a long time i thought a romantic relationship would be the only way for me to be validated in my gender (if my partner was romantically attracted to men and was romantically attracted to me, then they must see me as a man so that means society sees me as a man and i get a stamp on my Transmasc Card or something)

- i thought a romantic relationship would be the only way for me to have a long-term/committed relationship (i’m not good at keeping friends)

- the times i have wanted a romantic relationship the most i have been the most insecure

- i enjoy reading/writing/watching romance (see clarification above) and have hardcore ships. but only queer ships?

- i really really wanted a romantic relationship (again, see above)

- i’ve been imagining my wedding since i was Baby because ohmygod big party and loving someone/people and them loving me

- i had a very intense “crush” for a few months on my best friend in middle school

- i like to cuddle/whatever and am ambivalent about kissing (which i’ve never done so i guess i can’t really have an opinion on it)

- up until i began questioning, i always thought i would be in a typical monogamous relationship, get married, have kids, etc.

- a while back my sister told me she had never had a crush and i didn’t understand how that could be (before i knew aspec was a thing)

- both my therapists think it is just how relationships are/this is just phase/i’m confused/etc.

- i am extremely introverted so maybe all this is a result of that rather than being aro

thank you for reading and taking the time to respond to my stupid long ask, i love and appreciate you all!!!

There sure are a lot of relatable aro things in here. Fake crushes, thinking you want to date someone and then realizing that you don't actually, having different feelings about fictional romance and real romance, not thinking about relationships when there's no one around to put it on your mind, wanting a relationship for the sake of proving you're not cis/het… you're certainly not alone in any of those things.

You might benefit from the term "alterous attraction" which can be used to describe an emotional pull that doesn't fit neatly into platonic or romantic. Kind of like gender, this is one of those binaries that more or less works for a majority of people, so we end up acting like the area in between or outside of it doesn't exist.

Closeness, commitment, kissing, and cuddling are not actually exclusive to romance. These are common motives for aros to pursue queerplatonic, alterous, or similar relationships. Wanting those things does not preclude you from being aromantic.

Therapists, like anyone, are not always great when it comes to aspec issues. There's a good chance your therapists would tell even the most obvious aro person in the world that it's just a phase or a repression problem. I'd suggest looking for a new therapist, maybe taking a look at arorecommended. If you can't do that, then it's probably best to avoid the subject of romance.

Being introverted doesn't seem to stop plenty of alloromantics from having yearnings and crushes. They might have a harder time actively pursuing those crushes, but the same desires are there.

Overall there's nothing here that makes me want to say, "Yeah that's romantic attraction". If you think aromantic fits better than any other arospec label, go for it.

#mod twilight #aromantic #arospec #questioning #alterous attraction #arophobia

17 notes · View notes