#THAT is just two people of the same gender in a relationship | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

stayinlimbo · 17 hours

Text

We Become We

pairing: husband!lee minho x reader genre/warnings: friends to lovers, marriage of convenience, fluff, poor attempts at me trying to be funny, mc's gender is not specified word count: 1.02k note: i am not dead yay. i tried my best since i haven't had time to write for almost a month so please take this as a peace offering ♡

Marriage. It’s an interesting concept, isn’t it?

You’ve always thought so, at least. Two people agreeing to sign a legal document and tethering their lives to each other for whatever reason, be it love, societal expectations, familial pressure, financial security, etc.

Yours happens to be a man named Lee Minho. The same man you’ve been friends with for as long as you can remember. The same man who asked you to marry him for a reason you didn’t get to learn until he was already down on one knee.

(“I’m sorry, you want me to WHAT?” “Marry me. Please, I need health insurance.”

“Okay, yes, sure, whatever; now please get off the floor. People are staring.”)

Lee Minho, who, after dragging you to the courthouse and legally becoming your husband, finally elaborated on how his job would pay him more and cover both of your health insurances if he was married. So really, in his words, he was “doing you a huge favor” by marrying you.

And, in all honesty, he really was. No, you didn’t have a ring to show off your new husband’s weird skill at finding loopholes in company policy, and you’re like thirty-five percent sure the two of you are committing some kind of marriage fraud, but does it really matter when you can finally start using the hot water in your dingy apartment without worrying if you’ll have enough money to fund your crippling caffeine addiction? The government will have to drag you kicking and screaming before you resort back to mankind’s cruelest form of torture: cold showers.

Not to mention that marriage didn’t even change your relationship with Minho. And why would it? You’re still you, and he’s still him. He gets on your nerves just the same, maybe even a little bit more after he decided to frame your marriage certificate in his living room and send a photo to all your mutual friends. You’ll never forgive Minho for laughing at your helplessly panicked state when the group chat wouldn’t stop exploding with messages and incessant calls.

You’re still his best friend that resides in his apartment four out of seven days of the week while he inhabits yours for the other three. Maybe that’s why, two weeks after your “wedding,” when it was time to renew your lease, Minho suggested with a simple shrug of his shoulders that you move in with him since “you’re here all the time anyway.”

You’ve really got to learn how to say no to him because now you wake up next to your best friend/roommate/husband in his one bedroom, one bathroom apartment at the crack of dawn with a light pressure on your chest and fur in your face when his cats decide you need to wake up right now to feed them.

Not to say you don’t like the new arrangement! No, that would be the furthest from the truth.

Sure, you didn’t appreciate your skin care routine being interrupted by the unexpectedly high-pitched scream Minho let out when he saw you in a face mask for the first time, and what kind of person still has their phone’s brightness turned up all the way before bed? But who else would willingly tolerate your deliriousness before your morning coffee or indulge in your pleas to cook your favorite food three days in a row?

Living with Minho has only made the purely platonic feelings you harbor for him grow stronger.

That’s what the fluttering in your chest means every time you see him, right? The reason for the smile that grows on your face when you hear the distinct jingling of keys at the front door?

Yeah, that must be why heat spread across your cheeks when he handed you his phone to text one of his friends back, because since when did the heart emoji make an appearance next to your pinned contact name?

You just care about each other, that’s all. It’s normal to want to make sure he arrived at work safely and ask how his day is going during your lunch breaks. It’s normal to start receiving back hugs before bed—a comforting weight as Minho’s chin rests on your shoulder while you apply the rest of the products to your face.

It’s natural to have doubts about the nature of your relationship during an evening walk, acutely aware of his fingers lightly brushing against yours as you silently study his features illuminated by the soft glow of the scattered streetlights. What if he meets someone else and falls in love with them and wants a divorce and– oh.

Has he always looked at you like that? With his gaze softening as it locks with yours? With the corners of lips lifting into the gentlest smile you’ve ever seen? With all the stars shining above you finding a second home in his eyes? A look so loving that it takes your breath away and you can’t tell if you’re about to laugh or cry in relief.

And when you return home to get ready for bed, the familiar feeling of hands wrapping around your waist and a careful pressure resting by the crook of your neck quells the remnants of your worries.

It’s you and Minho. Minho and you, just as it always has been. Just as it’s always meant to be.

The distance between your bodies on the bed becomes nonexistent when you curl yourself into his side, laying your head on his shoulder and intertwining your legs with his as he immediately, unhesitantly, adjusts his arm, his fingertips finding purchase on exposed skin and roaming across the span of your back. A kiss to the top of your head is the last thing you feel before the gentle lull of breathing and the rise and fall of his chest begin to soothe you to sleep.

…

Ah, marriage—what an interesting concept. Two people agreeing to sign a legal document and tethering their lives to each other for whatever reason, be it love, societal expectations, familial pressure, financial security, etc.

You love your husband, and you’re beginning to think he loves you too.

liked this work? want to let me know how i did? please like, comment, and/or reblog; they are greatly appreciated my asks are always open ♡

taglist: @linospuddin @linocz @spicyhyunn

161 notes · View notes

communistkenobi · 2 days

Note

in that post abt the gender unicorn graphic, in the comments the idea of the “split attraction model” is brought up and you say you dont want to litigate that. however, im really curious what your opinion is bc i have some ideas abt it too. i feel like its sort of an incomplete analysis? like, people feel different ways about others and that cant really be flattened into like two modes of attraction. but i personally would call myself aromantic and bisexual so obviously i have some level of investment of the idea. anyways i just ask because in general i find your analysis and opinions compelling

thank you! re: this graphic

My issue with splitting “physical attraction” and “emotional attraction” is that it does the same naturalising trick that the chromosomes-as-the-symbol-of-sex does - by splitting the emotional from the physical, this implies that physical attraction is natural, without emotion, and by the same token that emotion can exist completely detached from the physical body of the person you emotionally desire. Like I just don’t think this is true! For example, the idea of “casual sex,” ie sex that is devoid of emotion/emotional investment, is a social construction, it is a sexual act that is being contrasted against societal norms of “serious sex” or “invested sex” or whatever you want to call it - sex that is being done in the context of a monogamous, married relationship, or an otherwise exclusive long-term one. the base social unit of much of western society is the nuclear family, and the nuclear family is “ideally” produced by monogamous, cis-heterosexual, racially homogeneous reproductive sex. That is the norm by which all other sexual behaviour and activity is judged by.

and to be clear I’m not using “emotional” in an idealistic or moral sense, I am not using it as a shorthand for romantic feelings, I am purposefully using the language the graphic is using - I mean any emotion. Like just to be super clear, I’m not suggesting that people who have casual sex all secretly love the people they fuck, or that sex has to always be a serious emotional endeavour, or that people who do not feel sexual attraction to the people they have romantic feelings for are secretly lying, but that I don’t think sex is something that can be devoid of emotionality entirely. Like I think we are engaging in this Cartesian body/mind dualism where the physical acts we perform are somehow wholly separate from our emotional states. Pleasure has an emotional component to it, I don’t know how to articulate my experiences with pleasure that do not involve some level of emotionality, and emotionality has a physical character to it. Like in fact I think this graphic is treating emotions as ideal states - it reminds me of like old misogynistic psychological theory that described rationality as an absence of emotion, that to engage in rationality is to move away from emotion. It treats rationality as “out there,” objective, natural, detached from social influence, and emotion as “in here,” in our hearts, ruled by the social. And this distinction is made on the idea that the social world is detached from the physical world, which is pure idealism.

this is not a dismissal or denial of anyone who feels a disconnect between their sexual and romantic desires, such as asexual or aromantic people - while I am neither of those things, I have experienced intense physical desire for the person I’m fucking while actively dissociating during sex as a result of dysphoria/heteronormativity/etc etc. by the same token I have also felt emotionally compelled to be physically attracted to someone without actually feeling physical desire. These are both emotional states that were in conflict with my physical desires, or rather my physical desires as I understood them at the time. our ability to interpret and understand our desires is itself social! otherwise heteronormativity wouldn’t be a thing. We don’t have unmediated, unemotional access to physical desire, which I think this graphic is arguing, intentionally or not.

so having complicated, contradictory, disconnected, or otherwise ‘non-normative’ relationships to our emotional states vis a vis physical desire is obviously very real, and the reason they are real is because physical desire is also socially mediated and constructed. What and who we find attractive, why types of bodies, physical and character traits, etc are attractive to us are all part of (joker voice) society.

now, idk how you easily communicate this in graphic format. perhaps these things are unsuited to the medium of easily digestible graphics, or perhaps I’m limited in my imagination. either way I don’t think bifurcating emotional-desire-as-social and physical-desire-as-natural is particularly helpful

#asks #disabling reblogs because um. well you know what tumblr is like #this is not ‘ace discourse’ or whatever the fuck I’m not doing that shit and if you start on here I’m gonna block you #even old new york was once new amsterdam

86 notes · View notes

bloody-wonder · 6 months

Note

First of all, thanks so much for sharing your books recs and reviews. I love reading your blog (especially since I did not find many books blog that as good as you in tumblr). 💐🥰

Can I ask your opinion on something? So, I saw some discussion on why shounen series (or series with strong bromance vibes) have more romantic vibes than BL manga/mahwa (MLM books). (Sorry, do you like any BL manga/manhwa or shounen series?) And I kinda agree. But what do you think?

Sorry for this random ask, feel free if you want to ignore this ask....

wow thank you! i love sending my bookish posts into the void and i love it even more when the void expresses its appreciation haha

i didn't know about this discourse but in general i agree with the controversial (?) opinion that non-canon queer-coded or homosocial relationships oftentimes make for more compelling ships than their canon counterparts. one could argue that it's bc something that is just out of reach feels more appealing than something that you already have but in regards to my personal frustrations when reading romance stories and plotlines it often comes down to how the relationship of characters who the author already decided are going to fall in love has little room to breathe beyond that - the sword of damocles of romance is constantly hanging over them and determining their entire narrative. there's little intrigue in that bc when you're an experience reader or a genre-savvy media consumer you know exactly how it's gonna go, bit by bit.

furthermore, i think it's interesting that women and people who used to identify as women when they were young are likelier to write an explicit romance or a canon queer relationship bc they have been socialized to value that type of fiction and in doing that they will, whether by intention or not, regurgitate all the possible tropes and clichées which doesn't necessarily make their original story a compelling romance. by contrast, people who grew up socialized as men have been taught to suppress emotions and value no homo male bonds with their bros which is why a stereotypical cishet male sff author will 1) write an absolutely yucky romance for his male lead and his female love interest, 2) rather die than acknowledge that queerness exists and 3) pour all the most profound and intense feelings his conscious and subconscious mind is capable of into the depiction of the male lead's relationship with his male sidekick. ambiguity tends to make things more interesting so no wonder people will feel more drawn to a ship that is ambiguously homosocial in eve kosofsky sedgwick's sense rather than to a ship that is merely a love story between two people of the same gender.

which brings me to my last (more personal) point: as someone who has been socialized as a woman i am slightly obsessed with romance. however, as someone who identifies as aroace i don't find most romance books or even romance subplots relatable or compelling. this contradiction is a source of constant frustration that accompanies my reading experience - i often seek out romance books bc i do so enjoy a good love story and end up disappointed and alienated most of the time bc of this built in failure to connect with fiction that is written by allos for allos. for example, i have tried to take refuge in historical mm romance bc i figured that neither comphet nor modern identity politics would spoil the magic of two people falling in love for me in this case. however, having read quite a few of those, i have noticed this compulsion the authors have to 1) let the reader know by any means necessary and as soon as possible that the characters in question are in fact into men and 2) state explicitly that these men find each other attractive - a compulsion that speaks to the allo experience of being aware (most of the time) what type of person you're attracted to and being able to interpret a perceived connection as romantic or sexual attraction almost immediately. a compulsion which i, as an aroace reader, find utterly bizarre and terribly frustrating. not to shame allos for how their sexuality works or anything, but i think trying to convince the reader that two characters are into each other without relying on these two conveniences would be a good writing exercise.

by comparison, a relationship that is just allowed to develop without its participants interpreting it as a romance (bc the author who wrote it didn't intend them to at all) feels like freedom. yes, it's unfortunate that they won't kiss or fuck in the end of all that quality time but ah well, i can go to ao3 for that. and yes, if they're not canonically queer it's not real rep etc etc but i think that by now we have all understood that media consumption is not activism and queer rep in your favorite tv show will not bring about the age of tolerance. what i'm talking about in this post is why it sometimes feels like queer fiction fails to depict queerness and romance in a compelling way.

#asks #book tag #sometimes it's just like #no no THIS is queer #THAT is just two people of the same gender in a relationship #the specific examples i have in mind rn are empire of the vampire and the winnowing flame #the banter between gabriel and jean-françois is just inherently better queer content #than that what's his name side character's storyline #that one tentacle harness scene in the bitter twins is queerer than all the canon queer love stories of the series combined #something else i didn't discuss here is how diversity being used as a marketing tool in publishing instantly kills the mood #it's like that one oglaf strip - if we both know what's happening it ruins it #hashtag gaystream ig

6 notes · View notes

mermaidsirennikita · 5 months

Text

always wild to see people freak out over dark romance novels when you know they're also like... Spuffy shippers? or something along those lines?

I mean, I have no issue with that lmao, I've had ships that are on the same level, but I don't know, it's just like... are you romanticizing the thing you're shipping to the point that you don't recognize its own darkness, or are you fully aware of that and just knowingly hypocritical?

#romance novel blogging #every week twitter declares that society is crumbling because of silly dark romance novels #and usually not even the REAL dark shit lmao #and every week it is the dumbest moral panic i've ever seen #but yeah dude it when you can literally see people with the WILDEST ships handwringing that i get really confused #like okay so the books are undermining women #but the women falling in love with their attempted rapists onscreen... are not..................#and to clarify to me it's just a quality of the work thing; the content itself there doesn't concern me #I MYSELF do not think spuffy as an example was handled well and the context of joss being who he is #retroactively makes it worse than a dark romance written by some random very normal lady keying into common fantasies #like mitzie or heather or whoever doesn't want to go out there and assault someone. probably #whereas joss.....................#wasn't allowed to be alone in a room w a teenage girl #and that isn't every showrunner ofc but a lot of visual representations of trauma #and romanticizations of these relationships onscreen are often written by people of the same gender as the perpetrator #whereas dark romance is often written by women--sometimes even women working out their own shit #and idk i'm kind of making that realization in real time as two why one bugs me more than the other #PERSONALLY speaking #and ofc that doesn't absolve women of handling SA whether it's romanticized or not badly #and CERTAINLY sa is not inherent to dark romance #which i think is a common misconception #dark romance in terms of genre is not 'rape and abuse as romance' it's honestly pretty broad #ANYWAY. thoughts over #just focus on the people who are actually preying on others plsthx

7 notes · View notes

butchladymaria · 1 year

Text

ok but seriously. i know “doll as a mourning doll” is a popular interpretation but i spent hours hunting for credible sources on the subject and the longer you spend actually understanding what a mourning doll was, the less sense that claim makes. mourning dolls were:

1. made for infants and very small children and made/commissioned by their parents. it was not something people did for any deceased loved one. if an older child died, there were other methods by which to memorialize them — some of the more “extreme” by modern standards being post-mortem photography with the corpse and mourning hair art.

2. they were more like sculptures than dolls — made of wax due to the rise in wax sculpture as used for medical purposes. some were weighted to help a mourning parent, but that is as far as it goes based on the actual historical evidence. they weren’t articulated, as the doll is.

3. mourning dolls are the product of an entire complex cultural landscape with very specific attitudes towards children. as a result, mourning dolls are very much bound up in those attitudes. even if the previous inconsistencies don’t deter the equivalency, i think a lot of people make it without actually realizing the full weight of what they are implying about the doll, maria, and gerhman.

tl;dr i am begging people to please please please understand what things are in context before making that kind of false equivalency because i know for a fact some of yall do not mean to imply that gerhman viewed maria the way the victorians viewed literal infants

#bloodborne #the plain doll #gerhman the first hunter #i can link so many sources if anyone wants them but seriously oh my god 😭#its especially bad because a lot of those posts are made by people who are trying to defend(?) gerhman or just generally really like him #and dont want him to seem That Bad lol #but like im really sorry but you r NOT making the point you think you are #i dont think its On Purpose #because actual credible sources about mourning dolls is pretty hard to find #the wikipedia makes a Lot of claims and links only two sources #and one of those two links is broken #basically like #if you want to make the case that gerhman wasn’t weird to maria or the doll #the mourning doll comparison is really shooting yourself in the foot #like pls #those takes are fine and deserve to be made #i think hes a really tragic character the same way laurence is because of The Hubris etc #but by trying to Completely minimize and explain away how gender factors into his relationship to the doll #you are doing the character a disservice #not trying to vague anyone here i just genuinely see multiple people make this claim and its easier to make my own post than to reply #to each post that says it #ik some ppl have decided im incapable of having intelligent opinions because one (1) post breached containment like 6 months ago #but that is not my problem lol #like im sorry ur bitter that One Person said something mean abt ur problematic fav on tumblr dot com #but also i dont really care about internet strangers tht much #basically if u are 1 of those and i havent managed to block u yet this post is not for u

24 notes · View notes

luxeberries · 1 year

Text

something that's really fun about steddie (and most ships honestly) is that we don't necassarily use their canon relationship as a base for fanfiction/art. like. we take how they interact in canon and then infer how they would act if they got closer to eachother and that's the base for most fanfic/art. idk. i think its interesting how that works. like people always say 'but they interacted like once' and its like. yeah so? the point of shipping isn't to only use canon, its to build off of that. if you know how two(or more) characters act individually you could literally put them together even if they have never interacted in canon because you know how they would interact. i just think its silly when people say 'they spoke three words to each other' because like. that's not the point. use your imagination.

#steddie #like i get its annoying when people ship two white dudes who've talked exactly once-#and ignore the two girls who have a basis for a real relationship #i get it. entirely. it's a fandom thing every fandom has this issue. i dont really know why. im not immune to it but for. gender reasons.#but also. what i said above.#fandom and shipping is about. having fun and doing whatever the fuck you want #which includes shipping two random dudes who have never spoken because you think they'd like each other #the witcher fandom is absolutely. ridiculous with this though i gotta say it lmao #like i do not understand the whole shipping jaskier with valdo. a man we have never and will never meet and have no idea-#how he acts/is as a person #and the only line we have is jaskier trying to kill him via djinn #which is. funny as fuck actually.#like yeah yeah there's potential there to like. explore their relationship and WHY jaskier the pacifist wanted to murder him but like #come on #valdo isnt even a CHARACTER he's a throwaway line #and the fandom just made this guy up. hes the fandom's OC. dfhsdfh #same with lamberts friend aiden. which i also completely get but like damn. you really just be making people up aodfhladfhdlafhdlsfh #ill shut up

38 notes · View notes

featherfur · 3 months

Text

A lot of times in fandom I find myself looking at lesbian ships and I’m like

Are they really lesbians or are these two women just the only ones left not paired off and y’all are allergic to aro/ace characters and believe that bi people in m/f relationships are still basically straight?

#danny talks #no but seriously #not only are they paired off and people lose their mind if they’re shipped w a guy and insist ‘no she’s CLEARLY A LESBIAN’ because you don’t #like the ship #to the point that people get genuinely threatening (looking at the WQ and JC haters here I don’t even like it but the haters are too much)#but that also lets you push them into a tiny corner where the only way they’re accepted is if they’re uwu perfect girls in a soft pastel r #relationship*#sometimes gay ships that are gay just to pair off are worse #don’t get me wrong I’m not saying everyone is doing it rarepairs and crack ships exist for a reason #I’m saying that the need to push two ppl of the same gender together just to pair everyone off is obnoxious #and it’s additionally obnoxious when you do it to WLW because y’all never give #a damn about actually fleshing out the character just pairing them off so they can’t get in the way of your mlm ship #you can have your ‘these two are the only girls in the room so clearly they’re lesbians’ but for the love of god pls treat them as well as #you do the male characters #I’m dying out here #also stop being fucking aro and bi-phobic or I’m coming for your knees

6 notes · View notes

moonlayl · 1 year

Text

The Stark and Hargreeves siblings have a special place in my heart because it’s so rare to find characters in western media that have more than two siblings, and even rarer where they’re all relevant to the plot and so widely different.

#except for maybe Rickon lmao #but like come on #they have a different relationship with each of their siblings and you get to see that #and their siblings do affect their lives #and growing up among so many other people of various ages (or powers ig) has definitely affected #their worldviews and what they've been taught; etc...#it's so realistic to how siblings are in real life #especially families like mine who do have many siblings #the funny thing is...even when you have what would be considered. lot of sisters/brothers #you never actually think of them as such because it's just...normal #in hollywood #characters are usually an only child or they have the 1 older/younger sibling who's usually unimportant #maybe two siblings if we're pushing it #(and usually they're the same gender)#house stark #starklings #robb stark #jon snow #sansa stark #arya stark #bran stark #rickon stark #hargreeves siblings #luther hargreeves #diego hargreeves #allison hargreeves #klaus hargreeves #ben hargreeves #five hargreeves #asoiaf

20 notes · View notes

aeide-thea · 1 year

Text

[witcherposting ahead—nb that this is all totally lighthearted and it's fine if you feel differently!]

anyway what i'd started to say before tumblr ate my post was that like. disclaimer that my approach to netflix witcher canon is that i fully reserve the right to cherrypick, because some of the changes they made were good but others were character assassination, and that obviously i get that if one isn't cherrypicking one does have to actually Grapple With Certain Things 🏔

but like. that said—the more 'Geralt Must Grovel for Weeks and Probably Scourge Himself, Look at What He Did to Poor Sad-Eyed Woobie Jaskier' fics i read the more i'm fucking grateful for the tiny handful where jaskier's just been like, yeah, i never bought that bullshit tbh, he was lashing out and he owes me an apology for sure but a single angry outburst does not in fact scupper an extremely well-established relationship of literally twenty years' standing in one fell swoop???

like i just. idk. imagine remembering that jaskier's a cheery irrepressible little shit and not actually as crushably low on self-esteem as all of us are. of course that would probably require *netflix* to have remembered that, so, you know, no actual shade to anyone who's been projecting that onto him! but just like. idk. they're obviously not siblings but they honestly do have that vibe in certain ways and it's just like. did you never say something overdramatic and shitty in the heat of a fight with yr sibling growing up and then after taking a bit of a breather just like. make a rueful face and apologize for yr respective roles in winding each other up and move tf on, without having, like, a whole extended OTT reparations process where you tell them repeatedly how perfect and sinless they are and how you know you're a miserable worm who doesn't remotely deserve their sunshiny presence in your life but would be so grateful if they could, possibly, somehow, see their way to forgiving you despite yr essential unworthiness—

#anyway. i think there are like. MAYBE like three of you reading this blog who give a shit abt this fandom‚ lol #so i'm mostly just talking out loud to myself here‚ which is fine‚ what's a perblog for if not that #but it's just like. yeah on the one hand you don't just get to yell at people without apologizing at all #on the other hand like. some relationships are strong and elastic enough that one (1) snip is not going to cut them #even a vicious one!#also like. jaskier DID handle that convo clumsily lbr. like. obviously geralt was not Justified but.#if i'd just had a vicious breakup and somebody came bumbling in making loud awkward small talk about it? jesus.#anyway. really ultimately this is just a 'have consumed much too much witcher fic and the Patterns are starting 2 irk me' thing #but it's just like. sometimes things are conflict between two imperfect people #and not a Good Woobie and a Sinful Meanie #anyway. time 2 go reread Sekrit Mutual's fic in which they actually keep in mind the fact that jaskier is a selfish gremlin #who despite himself really does love geralt and as a result is like. constantly torn between his nature and his urge to do right by geralt #but like. fundamentally he's a buffoon and a popinjay who yaps aggressively and then runs back behind geralt's legs #and joey batey leaning into his Soulful and Romantic side (that he does also have) doesn't actually erase that about him‚ nor should it!#anyway. this post is careening all over the place but i think it's just like. exactly the same weird terfish moral binary #that ppl have been talking abt with like. gender and kink and a whole range of things #where like. you always have Victims and Perpetrators #and so jaskier has to be like. the femme bottom victim which makes geralt the macho perpetrator totally undeserving of sympathy #and it's like. actually they're both imperfect people and neither one fits very well into their society's idea of what a man is #and what if we actually examined them as individuals rather than tropes and also remembered yennefer was fierce and interesting #and what if ciri weren't‚ like‚ a manhattan private school girl with her brows done while we were at it #getting a little overambitious with my wishlist there though i know

14 notes · View notes

torgawl · 1 year

Text

the arguments homophobic people make against same sex couples raising kids makes literally zero sense considering they raise no problem to single parent families. the problem really isn't that there's an absent gender, because if it was they would chase and/or blame single parents and they don't.

#i never had a father and im okay with that i grew up just fine #my only problem was having to see people push down my throat my mother's ex was a father figure to me when he wasn't #just because he payed bills lol #homophobic people really turn a blind eye to abusive relationships and abandonment who actually traumatise children but look at two people #wanting to build a family who most likely have the resources to give them a happy life and suddenly the world is ending because they are #the same gender #it has no logic other than most of those people don't know how to critically read a 2000 year old book ✌️#i don't accept religion as an excuse because there's plenty of religious people who respect others #feeling angry about homophobia on this monday morning sorry about that #if i could push a homophobe in the face rn i would imagine caring other people are living their lives and trying to be happy 😭#by doing normal things too 😭#how dare you be gay (out of the norm) and try to perform normal society tasks that do not alienate you further from me?#< what they sound like #they're literally just scared that a gay person can look like them and do what they do #imagine your own sense of identity being so weak...#and by normal i mean what's expected from couples obviously not having kids is okay #it should be normalised too #anyways ignore me people have a good day if you by chance read this xd

18 notes · View notes

mercuriart · 8 months

Text

hmmm i want to be. a little bit controversial. but i fear this is the no nuance no critical thinking webbed site. and i don't want to start discourse on this account. ill just. tags.

#yeah y'know what? yes. it's fair to say 'i dont have experience writing this marginalized gender/sexuality and want to research #before writing something offensive'#like. if you spent your entire life consuming mostly mainstream media (as we all have! yes that includes you!)#you probably learned a few stereotypical portrayals. or more than a few #you're probably used to seeing tropes used a certain way #you may not know those are problematic tropes with the specific whatever you're writing #like. you decide to write a wlw ship. you decide to do something urban fantasy proximal and apply a trope you enjoy. all is fine #whoops you've accidentally turned the butch in your classic butch/femme relationship into a monster. oh geez #and since you're used to seeing the trope with het couples you just. write it the same way #and now you have a portrayal of butches as violent agressive monsters. oh no #(yes this can be done with nuance but I'm talking about like. people new to writing mostly. people who haven't written about these subjects)#ok another example. you write a mlm ship. you think well it's two men i know how to write men. you decide to make one of them kinda evil #now you have a gnc dude that's evil and manipulative and a liar. oh no #again: you can add nuance and reclaim these tropes. write characters as full characters and all will be fine #but. BUT. if it's your first fic with such a ship. you may make mistakes with those nuances #some of those harmful tropes get WORSE if you add depth the wrong way #(again. happened to me. had to do a full rewrite of a character when i realized.)#i know it's really funny to dunk on homophobes/misogynists who dont realize that gay/female characters are. well. characters!#but to make fun of people for doing research/being worried about perpetrating harmful tropes #because they're inexperienced? c'mon.#also like 90% of y'all making fun of those writers (the inexperienced ones) COULDN'T write a nuanced aro or disabled character so.#a/n:#actually deleted that last tag. too scary

2 notes · View notes

a-trying-writer · 2 years

Text

[love - original story ft original characters. please dont reblog, but liking is okay.]

“I love you, so much, my dear,” Seth whispered between kisses against her neck.

“I know, my love,” Simone replied, with one hand dug into his long, snow white hair. “But something is bothering you.”

The former arch-demon of lust smiled against his beloved’s skin, before spinning her around to hold her in a tight embrace. He held her close to his chest, as if he was afraid of losing her within the blink of an eye. “I’m sorry, Simone, I have too much on my mind. I feel that I don’t cherish you enough.”

“But you do, my darling,” she replied as she lifted her eyes to stare into his and cupped his cheek. “You have been working harder than usual lately, which gives us little time for each other, but that’s the point of living this life we chose. You and I will still live forever, so please, don’t stop doing what you love just because of me.”

Seth gently wrapped his fingers around Simone’s wrist to pull it away from his face, and plant kisses against the palm of her hand. She is right, he thought. But he can’t help how he feels. “I’m sorry, my sweet,” he said in an apologetic tone. “Once I finish crafting up clothes for the upcoming show, you and I will go on vacation! It has been years since we last stroll down the beaches of Rios, didn’t we?”

“It has...” Simone replied, then shut her eyes to meditate. “To get tickets for the cruise will be expensive, because the Drifting City is growing closer to our region. Not many ships will go straight to Rios from here.”

“How unfortunate...” Seth let out a sad sigh, then shrugged with a smile. “But no price is too high when it comes to spending time with you!”

“Then you better get the tickets soon, Seth.” Simone then opened her eyes to give her husband a warm smile. “But you do know that no matter where we go, just being with you is enough.”

“And so do you.” He ran his fingers through her platinum blond hair, and brushed his thumb against her tanned cheeks. “I love you,” he said.

“I know,” she replied. “I love you too.”

“I know.” Unable to hold himself back any longer, Seth pulled Simone into a deep kiss.

#the story of theia #story of the lovers #this one was written in a short time.#and its sloppy so it needs work.#but other than that i got to thinking about my oldest ocs which are these two.#and their relationship is basically tooth rotting sweet. which is funny to me.#they are also the two strongest people in theia -- around the same level as two other important figures as well.#and yep they have a major influence in the fashion industry among other things.#also seth is a straight up ho because he was a high ranking incubus while simone was a plain old human.#and seth is also gender-fluid but likes to identify as a male most of the time.#demons really have no genders unless they wish to.#also simone is a light haired dark skinned woman; but her hair is either natural or straight up dyed.#and i have zero clue. before she became an oracle she had natural dark brown hair but that changed when she went to bring seth back.#there is this whole story that i made up about them when i was younger.#and they changed a lot with me too.#and aside from ara and osiris; these two mean a lot to me.#not just for being the ogs but also helping me realize things about myself and helped me grow.#anyway im rambling and tired.#need sleep.#hehe~.

4 notes · View notes

ellies-knife · 1 year

Text

Reddit wins this one

[Image ID: post from Reddit thread r/thelastofus titled "When is a gay relationship on screen not "political propoganda?""

Post reads: "It's the same criticism I see levied at the last episode over and over again. "I'm fine with gay people, but keep politics out of my entertainment."

I'm genuinely curious. How in the holy hell is a gay relationship pictured on screen inherently "political?"

It's maddening man. I'd prefer they just come out and say what they're actually thinking."

User catnap_kismet replies: "there are two sexualities, straight and political. there are two genders, male and political. there are two races, white and political. etc".

This reply has many awards and 1.2k upvotes

End ID]

#tlou hbo #tlou hbo spoilers #the last of us #edit: added an image ID. please let me know if its done correctly

95K notes · View notes

pondscummy · 5 months

Text

I feel like kind of a bad person for this but a lot of the time I really feel like I would heavily prefer dating a cis man to dating a trans man

#pond.txt #like i feel like such a traitor lmao and obviously t4t is wonderful #I'd never like turn down someone i liked for being a trans guy; my last two meaningful relationships were w trans masc people #i'd very happily do that again but. But......#idk i just. i Like cis guys in a way that feels more charged and more... idk i miss cis men. sure they can't understand my gender #but neither can i lmfao i don't know how much that matters to me these days so long as i felt safe and wanted w my partner #i literally always picture myself w a cis man as my partner and i think i feel safer w one sexually idk #i have a definite preference for dick and i've got a condition that makes my uhhhh hole entrance hypersensitive #in a painful way. and with cis men i can grin and bear some rly painful sex until the nerves get desensitized and it's easier #but with my ex i like Panicked w the strap and broke down crying bc it hurt and i didn't feel safe at all bc they couldn't like #feel what they were doing and respond to my comfort or lack thereof by touch-sense #it's hard to say 'just a little bit at a time' to somewhere wearing a strap unless they're actually watching them enter you #and that's so like. clinical to me in that moment bc *i'm* not turned on enough to see it as like. sexy that they're watching #i'm just thinking about being viewed while in pain and it feels so vulnerable in a Wretched way. not hot and nothing to distract me #meanwhile i've trusted multiple complete and total strangers w the same thing and been able to get through to a point where #i can relax and enjoy sex after they've initially gone in. but i Loved my ex boyfriend and i couldn't bear to even let him try #idk. and i sort of love the relationship cis men have to gender (aside from the more toxic elements)#like i love the ease of knowing they're men. the comparative lack of thought. in a sense that's More like my gender than what most trans #guys i know experience. i've had Very little dysphoria compared to most. i just am like a guy idk. i don't think about it or care to #i just always picture myself w a cis guy:( i wanna cis boyfriend

1 note · View note

phoenixyfriend · 3 months

Text

DISCLAIMER: I am not trans myself*, but I've been wondering what the spread of phrasing is. I consulted with a trans friend for options. These are ALL things I've seen or heard people say, including "back when I was a man" from a trans woman. This isn't about what you think people SHOULD say, just what you personally use.

Please stay polite about how people use language to describe their own experiences.

Cis people PLEASE do not vote, I want to see the actual spread of results, and too many "other" or "this is how I WOULD if I were trans" votes will skew the results. You'll get to see the answers in a week.

Finally, I recognize that some of these can describe different points in the same transition (e.g. "before I figured out" and "before I transitioned" can be used by the same person to describe experiences at two different moments), but just go with what feels best.

* I have a weird relationship with gender that's mostly cis but not quite, and not different enough for me to feel like Trans applies. I originally had a different, more joke-y phrasing there, but was told I might get flack for it since most people do not live in my brain.

#queer stuff #trans stuff #polls #Phoenix polls

3K notes · View notes

romancerepulsed · 4 months

Text

aspec terms for beginners!

since it's trending right now, i feel like it might be helpful to clear up some basic aspec (but particularly aromantic, as we are the center of attention currently) terms. if you have absolutely any questions, i would be happy to answer, either in the replies, dms, or my inbox!

★・・・・・・★

the split attraction model (SAM): a model of human behavior that posits that, for some people, romantic and sexual attraction are not the same.

[most often this will come in the form of someone being aspec on one axis and allo (not aspec) on another. for example, a biromantic asexual may be romantically attracted to two or more genders, but sexually attracted to none. some people may even use SAM for allo identities– a bisexual lesbian may be sexually attracted to multiple genders, but only romantically attracted to women (note that this is not the only way that someone can be an mspec lesbian, just one way!). the SAM does not apply to everybody, not even all aspecs! there are non-SAM aros, for instance, who do not differentiate their aromanticism from their sexuality.]

aspec: a collection of queer spectrums centered around the lack of a certain attraction or identity. the most common spectrums under the aspec umbrella are asexual, aromantic, agender, and aplatonic, though there are many other ways to be aspec.

asexual: experiencing little to no sexual attraction.

[aces can still have sex– whether its because they experience some amount of sexual attraction or they just want to participate in sex because they find the act appealing in some other way. that being said, there are still plenty of aces who have not and will never have sex. it is a spectrum.]

aromantic: experiencing little to no romantic attraction.

[aros can still have romantic partners– whether its because they experience some amount of romantic attraction or they just find relationships appealing in some other way. that being said, there are still plenty of aros who have not and will never be in a romantic relationship. it is a spectrum.]

agender: having no gender or little relation to any gender.

aplatonic: experiencing little to no platonic attraction.

[similarly to aros and aces, apls can still form friendships if they so desire– whether its because they experience some amount of platonic attraction or they find friendships appealing in some other way.]

aroallo: combination of aromantic and allosexual– allosexual being someone who fully experiences sexual attraction. an aroallo, then, is someone who is aromantic but not asexual. aroallos often do not have a standard relationship with sex due to its romantic connotations and the stigma against loveless sex. someone having sex with someone else they do not love does not inherently make them aroallo, much in the same way that having a nonsexual relationship with a partner doesn't inherently make either participant asexual.

aroace: someone who is both aromantic and asexual. because aro and ace are both spectrums, an aroace may still experience some amount of attraction on either or both of those spectrums, or they may experience attraction of some other kind (platonic, tertiary, etc.), and that attraction may be only for a certain gender or genders– these are known as oriented aroaces.

queerplatonic relationship: a type of relationship that is defined only by the people within it. i have a post dedicated to explaining this in larger detail.

partnering: an aspec (usually aromantic) person who has and/or desires to have a partnership or multiple partnerships– romantic, queerplatonic, or otherwise.

non-partnering: an aspec (usually aromantic) person who has no desire to form a partnership of any kind.

romance/sex/plato favorable: an aspec who desires or would not reject a romantic, sexual, or platonic relationship. they are also generally not particularly bothered by seeing these relationships in their day-to-day.

romance/sex/plato repulsed: an aspec who does not desire a romantic, sexual, or platonic relationship and generally does not like seeing those relationships in their day-to-day. [x] repulsed people are not necessarily judgemental towards people who desire or participate in those relationships, they just do not desire them for themselves. repulsion often takes the form of discomfort or annoyance. [x] repulsed people are not necessarily cruel sticks-in-the-mud– they are perfectly capable of being respectful, and they very often are. repulsion does not always stem from trauma, though it certainly can.

romance/sex/plato positive: not to be confused with favorability, [x] positivity is the belief that romance, sex, and platonic relationships are human rights that should be supported and uplifted. someone can be [x] repulsed and [x] positive at the same time, because favorability/repulsion revolves around the self, and positivity/negativity extends to others.

sex/romance/plato negative: not to be confused with repulsion, [x] negativity is an inherently judgemental and harmful ideology. most commonly in the form of sex negativity, these ideologies are centered around the opposition to or personal judgement of people who engage in romance, sex, or platonic relationships. sex negativity in particular is embedded in western white supremacist societies and it is important for aspecs not to play into that.

those are the basics, but i have more information below the cut!

★・・・・・・★

> how are aspecs queer?

aspecs are queer because "queer" does not only mean LGBT. queer theory is about far more than just LGBT people– though they are undeniably a large part of it– queerness is any subversion of the traditional cisheteronormative standard. this includes things that cishets may take part in/identify with, because you do not have to be LGBT to subvert those standards. cishets who are gender-nonconforming are queer, for example. a good rule of thumb is that if you have to explain what you whole deal is to cishets, you're queer. queer does mean strange, after all.

traditional cisheteronormative conceptions of attraction, gender, and relationships do not account for aspecs. it is expected that everyone will one day form a traditional partnership with one other person, and that relationship will include sex (even if only for procreation, under some dogmas). virginity past a certain age is seen as a point of shame and something indicative of a larger problem in someone– in men, a red flag even. people past 30 without a relationship are pitied. our economic structure is build for couples and families– it's near impossible for someone to live comfortably alone. romance, friendship, and love are placed on a pedestal, treated as the meaning of life, the best thing anyone could ever experience. "love is the point of everything," as many posts on this site like to claim. people who reject these ideas are undeniably queer.

> i can get behind aros and aces, but the whole "aplatonic" thing feels like a stretch to me. how is not having friends queer? "platonic attraction" isn't even real.

aplatonicism is more than just "not having friends," and many apls have friends anyway, much in the same way that aros can date and aces can have sex. someone who does not have friends is not inherently aplatonic, they only are if they identify that little-to-no platonic attraction in themselves and choose to label themselves that way (just like how virgins aren't inherently asexual). still, apls who don't have friends exist, and they are all queer. what is a greater subversion of traditional cisheteronormative relationship structures than an outright rejection of what's seen as the most basic, fundamental relationship our culture has to offer?

you may not feel that platonic attraction is a distinct phenomenon in your own experience, and that's fine! ultimately, a lot of aspec terms exist for the utility and comfort of aspecs themselves. the SAM isn't for everyone, and platonic attraction isn't for everyone either. you do not have the authority to tell people what their own experiences are, nor should you care.

> i think it's sad that you're limiting yourself with these labels. you'll find someone one day!

for the broad majority of aspecs, our identities are not self-disciplinary, nor are they necessarily permanent. all queer people are capable of misunderstanding their identity or having a fluid identity– it is not a problem unique to being aspec. that being said, a lot of us may always be aspec and completely happy with it. being aspec is not a tragedy. the only thing i don't like about being aromantic is the judgement i receive from other people about it. non-partnering aspecs are not "missing out" on anything, because we don't even want the things we're rejecting in the first place. many of us are romance/sex/plato repulsed and are far more happy engaging with the world and with other people in different ways, because there is so, so much more to life than relationships, and it's wrong to presume that relationships are universally fit for everybody. telling an aspec that they'll find "the right person" one day is no different from telling a lesbian she'll find "the right man" one day. there is no "right person" for an aspec just as there's no "right man" for a lesbian. a lesbian is not "missing out" on a heterosexual relationship just because it's culturally perceived as superior and more fulfilling.

[disclaimer before anyone tries to do a "gotcha," i'm talking about a lesbian who is fully not attracted to men in any way. it's not like homophobes know the intricacies of gender identity and nonconformity as it pertains to homosexuality anyways.]

lastly, i wanna give a special shout out to the loveless aros and the relationship anarchists.

loveless aros are those who either feel little-to-no love as they understand it, or they are someone who supports the de-centering of love. they're worthy of a whole post of their own, but in summary: the loveless experience is all about finding joy in yourself and the countless things our world has to offer that are not dependent on the vague idea of love.

relationship anarchy is another concept worthy of its own post, but in essence it's an ideology aimed at abolishing the standard hierarchy of relationships (in the USA, depending on who you ask, its typically friendship < family < romantic partnership or friendship < romantic partnership < family) and allowing everyone the autonomy to define their relationships for themselves.

if i made any mistakes, let me know! and of course i'm willing to answer any questions anyone may have. :-3 thanks for reading my long ass post!

2K notes · View notes