#also i was using gay more of an umbrella term here! i'm all for bi zuko

[forgottenspring]

Mild rant on Alastor bc I'm tired.

*takes deep breath*

I was going to stay out of this so rip to my inbox.

Does anybody remember the whole ace doxing list on here? The whole discussion of not shipping gay characters with the opposite gender? The rep for pan/bi representation and the steps to do it right? Does anybody remember when ppl on here discussed how aros and aces aren't a part of the queer community bc they're not 'gay enough' in a way? Bc I do. That was about a decade ago. And I remember when Alastor was first introduced in the pilot and ppl not accepting he was aroace back then.

It doesn't matter if Alastor is entirely aroace and if he's capable of dating or not.

What matters is we still have so little ace representation and acceptance, especially aroace rep, that a few years ago when a real person Jaiden Animations came out as aroace, ppl tried to destroy her, bc even with a perfect valid explanation of her just saying aroaces are their own thing and she just doesn't want to date, ppl treated it like she was lying or was trying to sneak into the queer community and was straight or all the other horrible things yall might remember "fans" did to her.

Alastor being aroace isn't about being the rep of "Aroaces can feel attraction!!!" bc be real honest.

How many aroace popular characters can ppl list that a regular person on the street is going to know? Bc I've heard all their arguments to invalidate their representation.

Jughead? Oh you mean Cole Sprouse who made out and got it on with Lili Reinhart playing Betty bc he found her sexy? Oh but in the old comics he's a gay character whose in denial. Yelena Boleva? Who? Oh that woman? She's hot she's just traumatized and needs to find the right person. Charlie Weasley? Oh he was only in the books? He was confirmed as aroace through a passive comment most ppl didn't know about from the author that never used the term? Luffy? You mean one of the most shipped characters in One Piece? No he's just an idiot/childish so he doesn't understand girls are pretty. Caduceus Clay? Sorry I didn't watch Critical Role whose that? Are you sure he's aroace? He feels gay to me.

I can list more ppl, but I'm sure most ppl couldn't.

I remember the whole discussion of the pan/bi representation argument of "Yes! We know pan/bi ppl can date the opposite gender. But straight ppl don't know about pan/bi nearly at all or don't accept it," so showing it as gay, who know the term more, until it's shown clearly the character is queer and not "confused straights" they then can have opposite gender attraction. Bc sooooo many pan/bi characters end up "straight" at the end of their show/book. Bc I remember when ppl refused to accept that Deadpool is pan bc of his wife and started freaking out when he dated a nonbinary person in the comics or helped that one genderqueer person he knew.

Representation is about showing to ppl what they're not understanding about the identity in the plainest sense of the words of the identity, then when there's enough rep to show they're not all the same, then you can have the ones that break the rules.

Alastor whether or not he wants to date doesn't matter. What matters is this whole situation blew out of proportion bc ppl refused to accept that some ppl don't feel comfy shipping him. Bc they see themselves in him and don't want that. BUT! Also ppl under the aro and ace umbrella also have no rep and wanted to see him breaking the stereotype they probs have yelled at them of "You can't have a partner you're aroace I forbid it" and wanted to see thru their own experiences how that would be done.

Here's the problem.... As someone who has read a lot of aroace headcanon fanfics as an aroace....... A lot of ppl who are allo don't realize aroace "crushes" are missing emotions... That's why they're aroace. And they'll write them like they're the same just "muted" or "needs to warm up" kinda thing. Or make the character's love "childish" to explain the lack of romance/sex. Which is messed up. And that's the problem here.

Alastor didn't need to be this blown out of proportion of a situation. The problem is ppl found him sexy and the classic "But aroace hot, they can't be aroace bc why hot?" discussion got brought back up without the gentle post format discussions and instead it was a lot of shippers on tiktok with tiny word counts arguing a complex issue.

Ppl should be allowed to ship whatever (except problematic I know yall too well), especially if they see themselves in the characters and especially if they have the same identity and want to explore that!!

The truth of the matter is this is such a huge issue that just keeps happening bc ppl are too used to fandom queer spheres where ppl already know aroace means "off the table" and so they want to play with qprs or grayromantics/sexuals not knowing what that entails bc there's sooooo lil aroace rep that actually explores being aroace and a lot of ppl don't know the basics, and even how very different aroace "off the table" is when you aren't the classic "uwu I'm just innocent and have no friends or importance to the plot so just ignore me and have me be adopted by one of the main couples as a 'kid' figure."

Not to mention that a lot of ppl still think ace means aroace. That aces can't date bc there's ppl who don't know that romantic and sexual attraction are different!

I'm just.... So tired. So very tired of having ppl shout at me what it means to be aroace and being unable to look up the lil aroace rep we have bc of this issue I've seen a million times is all.

#Welp rip my inbox tagging bc some of yall might be blocking tags or are actually interested in this. #Just a tired aroace who was here for the whole tumblr debacle back in the day of the aroace community talking about their feelings. #aroace #alastor #alastor the radio demon #hazbin hotel #queer community #ose

[demonic-shadowlucifer]

Let's talk about Exclusionists and how they harm the community they claim to protect: A collection of hate.

Welp! Pride Month is just around the corner, and with it, exclusionist and TERF rhetoric. A few disclaimers before we get into this: -While this is about the harmful things Exclusionists have done, I would like to add that the Inclusionist Community can be *just* as guilty of doing the things I'm about to mention. -Furthermore, I believe that both the "Inclusionist" and "Exclusionist" labels are kind of pointless tbh, since being inclusive is just the bare minimum, y'know? -TERFs and their variants will also be mentioned since TERF Rhetoric is a frequent thing in Exclusionist communities, especially in Longsword Lesbian communities. -This is not intended to be a discourse post at all, this is mostly for educational purposes and awareness. Furthermore, I don't think being queer should be controversial at all.

-And of course, HEAVY trigger warning for the following: Exclusionism, TERF Rhetoric, Ableism, Suicide Bait, Encouragement of Violence and more. For this post, I have collected screenshots of many hurtful things exclusionists have said, and evidence to prove links to rhetoric from non-queer homophobes. These are screenshots from Tumblr, Twitter and Instagram as well. I give credit to @/animefacialreconitionsoftware01 on Tumblr, Exclusionist Struggle Tweets on Twitter, exclusmoment on Instagram and many others for these screenshots.

So, hang on, what even is an exclusionist?

An exclusionist is a group of mostly queer individuals who attempt to gatekeep the LGBTQ+ Community by claiming certain groups aren't truly queer or "not queer enough".

Exclusionist can be used on it's own, but also as an umbrella term for other groups, such as: Mspec Exclusionists (Battleaxe Bis) - A group of exclusionists that believe that other Multisexual labels outside of "Bi" are harmful, or that they're the same as bisexual. Their primary targets tend to be pansexuals and panromantics. Transmedicalists - A group of mostly exclusionists (Mostly trans people, but occasionally cis people), who believe that you must meet a certain number of requirements in order to be Transgender. While every transmedicalist has different views, the most common opinion is that dysphoria is required to be trans. One well known Transmedicalist is Kalvin Garrah. Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERF) - One of the most recognizable Exclusionist groups. While TERFs aren't inherently queer, their rhetoric can overlap with many other groups (Especially Longsword Lesbians and Transmedicalists on some occasions), so they get a mention here. There's not really much to say about them, outside of the fact that they're simply transmisic feminists. Their primary targets include trans women, but they may also target trans men, nonbinary folks, bisexuals and other mspec groups, intersex folks and sometimes ace/aro folks. The group also has *several* links to white supremacy. Longsword Lesbians - Speaking of Longsword Lesbians, this is a group that intends to fight lesbian erasure. This one might have had good intentions at first, but then started excluding other lesbians, becoming an exclusionist group, though I can't get much information on it's origins. Their primary targets include Nonbinary Lesbians, Mspec Lesbians and PNC Lesbians. They may also exclude GNC lesbians and trans lesbians, though not all of them do. Gravity Knife Gays - Exclusionists that target other gay men, primary nonbinary gays, Mspec Gays and PNC Gays. They may also target GNC gay men and trans gay men, though not all of them do. Aspec Exclusionists - I don't think I need to explain this one. So, why are they bad?

Well, there's evidence on how it's bad. Outside of erasure and gatekeeping harmless identities, a lot of exclusionists have a straight up habit of harassing other queer folks or calling for harassment. And there's plenty of evidence to prove it as well. I'm going to warn you, some of these contain suicide bait and slurs. Please proceed with caution if that sort of thing stresses you out. Some words are censored to avoid getting banned (and for my own comfort as well). Obviously, you have the ones that are simple gatekeeping, which is almost always bad.

(Image ID: A Tumblr post from user "alpinestag". The text reads "REAL lesbians don't date or sleep with men in their past lives! Let's be real, if your soul married a man 1000 years ago, you're bisexual"). I *was* originally going to give this person the benefit of the doubt and assume they were joking, but when I looked they had a *lot* of TERFy shit on their blog, so they were definitely serious.

(Image ID: A Tumblr post from user "didcourze". The text reads "on asexuals having sex, why would u want to have sex with someone if not attracted to them? i get it u still have a sex drive even if ure not attracted to people sexually but how could you justify using someone that u clearly have no interest in solely for sex, ur own pleasure, like that's so fucked??") And then, there's folks that will take it to more extreme levels, like these fellas. This one might not be calling for harassment, but it is *heavily* implied.

(Image ID: A screenshot from a Twitter post in dark mode that shows another screenshot of a Twitter user's bio, also in dark mode. Some information is blacked out in red. The primary tweet has the text "Fucking trenders. Excluse do your thing 💖" The screenshot of the twitter bio below the text contains many plant emojis and heart emojis, and shows the text "I genuinely want to be nice to you all", "hy/him/hers", "transmasch butch boi. OMNIGAY", "'TRENDER" on T" and other information about their location, age, followers and following and the join date. End ID). This one on the other hand... this is blatant harassment.

(Image ID: A screenshot of a Tumblr ask from an anonymous user. The message reads "transwomen are men and if they were really women you wouldnt have to be screaming it 100 times. also k yourself.". A word that starts with k is also blocked out in red. End ID). "Asexuals don't experience oppression" ....Are you sure about that?

(Image ID: A screenshot of a Tumblr dm by a user named "aphobickaito". Some words are blacked out in red. The messages read "D bitch.". Did your daddy r you so hard that your brain got fucked too and you think this dragon cake shit is funny? Because that's some shit". End ID) For those wondering, the last censored word is the r-slur. Some posts will also advocate for straight up violence, like these ones below.

(Image ID: A screenshot of a Tumblr post from a user named "aletheius". The text reads "I love being aphobic. if you don't want to bed the love of your life you should be beaten up and stuffed in a locker".)

(Image ID: A screenshot of a twitter message/post from user "gowonstiara". The text reads "asexuals deserve to d*3". End ID).

(Image ID: A screenshot of a twitter user's bio in dark mode. Some information and words are blocked out in either red or blue. A scribble of blue has the words "Irrelevant stuff here". The rest of the bio reads "k all bi/pan lesbians". End ID).

(Image ID: A screenshot of a twitter post from user "brontydownunder" in dark mode. The text reads "'They're putting asexuals in concentration camps in China' good. Put more". End ID).

(Image ID: An screenshot of a post containing an image of a cropped Asexual flag. The text on the flag is slightly edited, and reads "START KILLING US". End ID) A lot of exclusionist posts also have a *lot* of suicide bait in them as well, such as these ones shown below. Again, scroll with caution if you are sensitive to these sorts of things. There is also an f-slur being used with malicious intent in one of these.

(Image ID: A twitter post from user "beebies" in dark mode, with the two e's replaced by 3. Part of the text has been blocked out with red. The text reads "if u go by they/them go k ll urself no offense lol 😍". End ID). I was going to censor the slur in this one, but decided not to just to show how malicious exclusionists really can be.

(Image ID: A screenshot of a tumblr notification. Part of the text is blacked out in red. The text reads "net-angel reblogged your post: asexual faggots sh t yourself challenge". End ID) And then there's some that will just straight up admit to hating certain groups and even harassing them. Others will admit to being fucking proud of their bigotry.

(Image ID: A screenshot of a twitter post from "sinboundhaibane" in dark mode. The text reads "i hate trans men, yes. if you understood the material realities of the situation, you would hate them too".)

(Image ID: A screenshot of a twitter post from an unknown Twitter user. The text reads "does anyone have edits they want views on i'm about to bully a bi/pan lesbian supporter 🏃‍♀️". End ID)

(Image ID: Two tweets from Twitter users "pipcrgrace" and "ssapphrodite". The text on the first tweet reads "just say you hate he him lesbians and move on...", the text on the second tweet has four variations of "i hate he/him lesbians" and "i ha" at the end. End ID).

(Image ID: A Tumblr post from user "jwjdhdjsksks". The text reads "The panphobes are out in full force today and I'm so proud". End ID). It should be obvious on why this is bad. Advocating for harassment or straight up violence, or telling someone to hurt themselves over their identity is NEVER a good thing no matter how you look at it. No buts, whats or ifs. And that's not even the end of this either. There's also some exclusionists who will restate the *same exact* rhetoric that Anti-LGBTQ+ people spew around. Here's a look.

TERF rhetoric (And invalidation of nonbinary identities)

(Image ID: Three tweets from three users with their names blocked by red, yellow and teal respectively. The screenshot is taken in light mode. The first tweet reads "I've spoken to many girls on here who did transition due to bullying/pressure. Lesbians are also attracted to girls." The second reads The two aren't mutually exclusive, either. Some trans men and trans women identify as lesbians, too.". The third tweet reads "Lesbians are female only.". End ID). Hmmm, I wonder where I've heard THIS before.

(Image ID: A Tumblr post from an individual who's username is pixeled out. The text reads "I really hate the Blue's Clues pride video. They are literally forcing their mogai shit on to little kids. Why do they have to feed kids bs like "nonbinary gender identities" and "pansexuality" on to children!? Why? (Just to clarify: I am not against teaching children about LGBT stuff, I am against teaching children bs)." End ID). Some will admit to straight up misgendering people as well. Again, seems familiar?

(Image ID: A Tumblr post from user "feminismnightmare". The text reads "Hi if you claim to be trans and tell me you're not dysphoric I'm going to use your biological pronouns". End ID). *More* TERF rhetoric (I would also like to point out that the saying "men are trash" is almost always a red flag, no matter the intent, due to it's high usage with TERFs).

(Image ID: A screenshot from an unknown Twitter user. The text reads "Lesbianism is understandable because men are trash. Gayness is fair because trash like trash. Bisexual = greedy. Trans = mental illness. All the others.. nonsense". End ID)

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, a *LOT* of Exclusionists I've seen are also incredibly ableist and racist as well.

Many Exclusionists claim that some queer groups harm neurodivergent folks and POC, but... are we *really* sure about that?

(Image ID: A Twitter post from user "annadoescare". The screenshot is taken in dark mode. The text reads "i don't care about your mental illness. it's not my problem. stop making up these genders that embarrass the lgbt". End ID)

(Image ID: Two tweets from two users with usernames blocked out in red and yellow respectively. The screenshot is taken in dark mode. The first tweet reads "There are lesbians who like men. There are lesbians who are men. There are lesbians who are straight. There are lesbians who are bisexual. There are all this and more". The second tweet reads "This is why I hate autistics". End ID). ...Excuse me but what the actual FUCK. /neg

(Image ID: A Tumblr comment from user "trans-wojak". The text reads "being racist towards whites won't change slavery" with an analog winking emoji at the end. End ID). Straight up eugenics, TERFism or both? You decide! (I'm also slightly convinced this person has internalized ableism as well, but that's not really my say).

(Image ID: A Tumblr post from user "posttraumaticspacelesbian-blog". Part of text has been blocked out with red. The text reads "as a disabled womon i would like to point out that all disabled men should b k ed" End ID.)

Some will also compare some queer groups to arguably worse shit. Exhibit A:

(Image ID: A post from Twitter user "sinboundhaibane" in dark mode. The text reads "new poem: bi lesbianism is a fascist dogwhistle eat my shit". End ID). Exhibit B:

(Image ID: A post from Tumblr user "postmodern-baseball". The text reads "cops aren't class traitors, nonbinary lesbians are." End ID) And there's a SHITTON more too. But I could never do it justice in this post, especially with TERFs. Now, before you exclusionists come at me with "But NOT ALL OF US ARE LIKE THAT!" or "Inclusionists do this too!" First off, I am fully aware that inclusionists are guilty of some of these as well, which is why I don't use the inclusionist label. But that's besides the point, I don't care if you're not like the folks in this post. I don't care if not every exclusionist is like this. THIS is what Exclusionism promotes. THIS is what Exclusionism encourages. Exclusionism is always going to encourage harassment and infighting. No matter how civil you are, no matter how "chill" you are, no matter how "nice you are, it doesn't matter in the end. By excluding other queer folks from queer spaces, you are actively condoning harassment. No, I don't want to hear any excuses. Exclusionism has and always will be harmful to other queer communities. Still don't believe me? Here's some videos that show and explain the exact same thing, as well as some other educational videos thrown into the mix. Transmedicalism: An Investigation. Breaking my Silence on Kalvin Garrah: Part One, Part Two , Part Three. Inside a Cult: A Series about Gender Criticals. Why is Queer Discourse so Toxic?

Addressing my "Lesbophobia" - A Rant about Mspec Lesbian Exclusionism.

What are TERFs?

The problem with Radical Feminism.

And of course, here's my Mspec Lesbian Exclusionism analysis post.

#lets talk about stuff #anti exclusionist series #f slur #mogai #queer #liom #lgbtq #nonbinary #xenogender #transgender #asexual #aromantic #aspec #pansexual #mspec #mspec lesbian #mspec gay #lesboy #exclusionist #fuck exclusionists #fuck terfs #trans rights #bisexual #queer activism #long post #read pinned before interacting #general tw

[aseriesofunfortunatejan]

The thing that gets me rolling my eyes about the well-intentioned argument that "yes this group is queer... but only if they're comfortable reclaiming that slur!" is that not only, as a response to the first half of that sentence, it's deflecting from the point, but also that it's a misunderstanding of the word queer.

As an aroace woman, I'm not queer because I've decided to reclaim that word. I'm reclaiming that word because I am queer whether I want it or not.

The term queer was made up by cishets to define anyone who wasn't them. It was the first instance of a popularised word that put gay people, bi people, trans people, non-binary people, ace people, and more in the same boat. The term was pretty much immediately reclaimed. It existed because cishet society doesn't see the difference between all of us - and to us it was a reminder that we are kin. That we are a large group that can unify itself against those who are trying to reject us.

What I'm trying to explain here is that it wasn't "just a slur" for many years that people online decided to reclaim in the 2010s. There was always a process of reclamation. There were always queers who reclaimed it. It remained used as a slur - it remains the case that any word can be a trigger to someone and you need to respect people's triggers. But if the way you word your argument is that reclaiming the word queer is some new thing some people haven't gotten used to yet, you are mistaken.

Queer is more than just a slur; it's a representation of the way society views us. What made me realise I'm queer wasn't some ethereal process of figuring out the anime protagonist I need to be - it was acknowledging that my entire life, those who surround me have identified me as queer. They didn't care how, they didn't care what it meant: I was a queer, no matter what I did or said. If this didn't exist, if cishets didn't point the finger at "the queers" somehow, it would mean we live in a society in which everyone under the LGBTQ+ umbrella is accepted and viewed as just another example of the norm. That would be ideal, but that's not the world we live in, or one any of us has the option to live in. This is why we are queer, whether we want it or not, and all we can do is take it in stride.

Because ultimately, I'd rather be queer. Still, if you know you're queer, but for any reason, you'd rather not hear it - and that reason can be very serious - that is completely fair. The only thing you can't do is try to take away from a statement that is meant to remind you that someone in the group is your kin. "Aromantics are queer" (for example) should never be followed by a "yes, but". You know damn well why we're saying this. What we mean. You must also know we don't mean it as a slur, and that slurs aren't what the conversation is about. Be careful not to silence us over a nitpick that you are, most likely, ignorant about.

#jan essay #<- sorry i didn't mean to tag this as that at first #but i'll never find this post again in the future if i don't tag it

[lyricalapple]

I figured a day about asexuality was a good day for this.

I first learned that "ace" was an identity that even existed when I was a preteen, and, at the time, my only reaction was "oh. This is something that people are upset isn't widely known, and I don't know what it is - I should learn about it". And for years, this was pretty much my only reaction.

But the really important thing, for me personally, is that, well, ace was an option now. My options weren't "straight, gay, or bi - if none of those fit there's something wrong", my options were "straight, gay, bi, or ace". (I know now that there are even more options than that, and I'm sure I'll learn about even more in the future).

And yeah, it took me over half a decade to conclude that I was ace. Honestly, this was mostly because I didn't put all that much thought into it - knowing that whatever I was feeling was something other people had also experienced meant I wasn't worried about it. If I was straight I was straight if I was bisexual I was bisexual if I was ace I was ace. It didn't really matter to me because no matter what I was going to be able to find people like me who had words for us.

And I wasn't on Tumblr when I learned about this. I didn't know what Tumblr was called for another year or so. I was just seeing screenshots of websites on other websites. In hindsight, a lot of those screenshots were from here.

I just wanted to say thank you. I just wanted to say, that if you've ever explained what "ace" means, if you've ever attempted to explain attraction in its various forms, if you've ever explained ace as an umbrella term, if you've ever shared an explanation around

You helped at least one person

And I'm sure you've helped many more

#ace #asexuality #asexual

[killian-whump]

Do you headcanon any of Colin’s characters as queer?

I sho' do! *pause* I think. I mean, it depends on your definition of "headcanon" and "canon" and "queer" and how much I'm thinking about it on a given day.

I mean, I headcanon Peter Sheerin as gay, but I personally think there's enough "hints" in the canon content that it doesn't really count as headcanon. But then again, it's definitely not stated and the hints are subtle, so it's also not canon, so... 🫠

WHAT IS CANON ANYWAY, OKAY?!

I think Gerry's ace, but I feel like maybe ALL the leprechauns are biologically asexual and reproduce magically by popping out of clover patches fully formed or something. I mean, look at that adorable little beansprout! He's never had sex in his life, and he'll never have to. BLESS.

Also, I think Wish Hook post-Gothel (which includes Old Hook) is asexual, but not necessarily by choice/nature, but due to trauma. However, Detective Rogers IS asexual by nature, because his persona was formed from Wish Hook's - so he's got the aversion to sex, but without the trauma that caused it, so he'd read as just plain ace.

But... Do those two (three? four?) count as queer? Depends on how you define "queer" and whether you consider these cases "true asexuality" (whatever the hell that means) or something else - and even whether you feel asexuality belongs under the LGBTQ+ umbrella or not (I personally feel it shouldn't, but accept that it usually does).

As for the others... Generally, I tend to assume any/every character could be bi unless canon gives ample evidence to the contrary. I mean, a 20 minute short or even a feature length film gives you so little information about a character's life that it's impossible to really rule anything out. Sure, Brennan's crazy about Nora... but who's to say twenty minutes after the film ends, he doesn't meet an amazing bloke in the audience and fall head over heels for him? And it would be an international crime to deprive the men of the world the beautiful fantasy that is the nameless lumberjack in The Words. Basically, I don't rule anything out unless canon rules it out, and then I'm a stickler for it.

Like with Killian Jones. This is where I differ from a lot of Hook fans. I know pirates tended to be gay or at least bi historically speaking, and I know people love to pair him with male characters (as do I, but only in whumpy ways)... but I just don't see it. Canon gives us non-stop evidence of his attraction to women - flirting with literally every one of them he meets, sizzling smolders, innuendoes galore, climbing towers and banging random strangers, etc... with ZERO of the same in regards to men. We never even got something on the same level as David's "Emma, I'm a married man!" So I just don't see it. At all. He's not the kind of guy to hide his attraction to... well, anyone. And given the historical gayness of pirates, there's no societal reason for him to hide any queerness he might have. I think he's just not into men.

I'm also a stickler for Gordo Cooper being straight. AFAIK, the real guy was straight, and when it comes to actual people, I don't think it's "okay" to headcanon them as anything other than what they present themselves as, even if they're presented in semi-fictional media and played by a super cute guy named Colin.

So... yeah. I mean, I think one dude IS queer, a couple more might be queer depending on how you define the term, a couple are straight... and the rest like girls, but might also like boys. I don't know, man. I only work here 🫠

[angelkittycore]

not to invite discourse but after i've been on tumblr solely for a few months after leaving twitter i've sorta let go of a lot of things that i was vehemently against and my opinion HAS shifted a bit.

(just saying straight away that you're welcome to engage with me on this topic but i am not seeking to incite arguments, fighting, or heated debate whatsoever and you're not likely to get me to change my mind on this. also if you're going to yell at me for using the term monosexuality please shut up and stay in your lane. if your first thought to reading that word is "bisexuals are being homophobic" then you have a biphobia issue.)

so it's not that bi lesbians/gays don't exist, i think their experiences are very much real. it's just the choice of contradictory labels, and the inherent biphobia, lesbiphobia, and taking self-autonomy from both bisexual men and women by attributing our entire bi rights movement to being a product of terf lesbian separatists, that i have a problem with.

terfs/political lesbians/gold star lesbians did spur an exodus of bisexual women from the umbrella of lesbian, but what came after was all us. and i both feel and think that it was a natural evolution of the communities because bisexuality is more than just women who love women and men, it's also men who love men and women. and nonbinary, abinary, trans, cisn't, gnc, and whatever else. (not to say that the last few aren't also included in monosexuality but i'm talking about bisexuality here.)

attributing the fight for our rights and voices to be heard solely to terfs is ahistorical and insulting. the want to be seen as a whole, valid, separate identity and community than both lesbian and gay has absolutely 0 to do with terfism and similarly aligned political bullshit (such as fascism/white supremacy/plain ol transphobia.)

wanting to go back to lesbian being an umbrella term for all lesbians and bi women feels way too traditionalist and downright conservative (in terms of the literal meaning of the word) for the lgbt/queer community. it's not about challenging cishetalloamatonormativity by simply existing or being unapologetically queer in a word that wants to stamp us out violently in this regard, it's wanting to reclaim a space and label that is no longer theirs because they feel entitled to do so.

to me, lgbt/queer progress is about growing and changing, and adapting to the world, and thriving in spite, and despite it all. and not clinging to relics of the past, however recent or not it was. as some examples, the meaning of asexuality has changed from its original coining. same as bisexual, and pansexual has gone through it's fair share of bullshit as well. why can't and why shouldn't lesbian do the same? however i do not feel that a change backwards is a change for the better.

as an another example, lesbian also used to mean homosexual women exclusively attracted to homosexual women but now it includes every flavor of nonbinary you can think of, who may or may not be women, women aligned, or even feminine at all.

lesbian no longer includes bisexuality under it and that should be okay. lesbian is a monosexual label, and that's okay. you do not experience bisexuality by also being attracted to similar/same genders, regardless of binary or nonbinary umbrella. because bisexuality, inherently, means attraction to similar/same AND opposite/different genders. (note, my descriptions here also includes xenogenders, alternative alignment systems, etc. it's up to the individual if they want to be included in any attraction, including lesbian, gay, bisexual+, and straight. grouping a wider group under lesbian attraction just because they are nonbinary is inventing a trinary and misgendering at worst.)

on the reverse, having a preference, however strong, does not make you a lesbian, or a monosexual gay. you are still experiencing bisexuality, you just have a preference. that is all. not everybody is bisexual, and not everybody is monosexual, and that's okay.

(should also note that comphet doesn't make a lesbian bisexual.. that's comphet.)

anyway tl;dr i think the language, terms, and labels you use you justify your valid experiences is.. not great, to put it politely, lol. i think your insistence that you should be able to call yourself bisexual or a lesbian when you're the other has problems stemming from misunderstanding both labels and attractions, and misunderstanding what exactly nonbinary is. i've also seen definitions of bisexual lesbians that say they are bisexual because they are also attracted to trans women which is.. do i have to say it?

anyway bisexual is not a dirty word or attraction. bi is beautiful, and the convoluted ways people try to get out of identifying as bisexual or solely as bisexual (if they are allo) is internal biphobia, which is not something to celebrate or be proud of. you should work through it.

#replies only so i can control who engages with me

[o-wyrmlight]

Anons on this site have such brainworms "this real life person expressed an opinion and analysis over something i dont like so im going to go into their inbox and tell them to kill themself, i am so smart and stand for justice"

Grow the fuck up, get off the internet, and realise that your little bubble is actively making you a worse person. Not you Bill, you are delightful <3

Fun fact: The word 'gay' used to mean 'happy or carefree' for centuries before it became re-adopted to refer to homosexual men, and even then, it became a slur.

Nowadays, gay is a reclaimed phrase that now references anyone under the homosexual and homoromantic umbrella. I'd bring it up as being the same pretense as lesbian, but with the whole crimew debacle, it's not what people are focusing on. And like I said--nowadays 'gay' is used as a broader term, even though it's still more associated with men than not.

Words change and shift in definition over time, like it or not. No one definition of a word is ever going to be universal--there are always going to be people who have a different interpretation of the word than you do. The word 'gay' once meant (and still does mean, though not nearly as frequently as it did before) cheerful and jovial. Then it became a slur of hate before being reclaimed by the community it was being used on. Now its definition has broadened, even if the very general definition still speaks by and large to men liking other men.

There's a lot more to it than that, but yeah. While I definitely don't know absolutely everything about LGBT+ history (a lot of the time, I get a bit stressed out about how people in the past were treated), it is something that I will do more research in.

The point is, you can't control how other people identify themselves and how their words are used. All that it does is make it more difficult for people to find words to identify how they identify and makes them much less likely to even try.

Even if you don't understand why they use something like 'bi lesbian', it isn't your role to come up with a narrative about what that person is trying to imply. And it isn't a good mindset to automatically assume that your perspective is more 'right' than them. All that it does is is exacerbate the whole 'us vs. them' mentality, which is terrible because all parties involved are in the same community.

Regardless of your opinion in the matter, your perspective does not deserve demeaning the life and existence of someone else just because they use a word a little bit differently than you. I understand that lesbian is a term that was specifically catered to exclude men, but calling yourself a lesbian does still carry its meaning in strongly implying that you at the very least prefer women over men.

Besides. The people who aren't going to respect lesbians aren't going to care whether people call themselves bi lesbians or not. It's not going to change their mindsets over whether or not they 'deserve' a particular woman, because there will always be people who think that they can 'change the mind' of a self-identifying lesbian, even if she's both homoromantic and homosexual. People are entitled like that. But there are also always going to be people who respect those preferences, as well, because--here's an important thing to remember--not all men are evil and out to get you.

I could go on about this so much more, but frankly, I'm just writing down my thoughts as they come, and if I continue, I'll be here all night. So. Yeah.

I have a lot of thoughts in my mind about this and other tangential issues, but I don't want to ramble on for too long.

I'm going to leave this off by saying that going up to other people, telling them to kill themself, and saying you hope they die in a fiery plane crash will never be helpful to anyone, and it doesn't prove you're right.

#tw: discourse

[a-faggot-with-opinions]

whys it appropriating to use top/bottom as a straight person (genuinely asking)

(Note: I use "straight" and "non-MLM" somewhat interchangeably here, mostly because the misusage of top/bottom/vers usually comes from cishet people and cis bi women. I also don't really touch on trans women using the terms here for the sake of time and also because I don't really care what transfems do with their connection or lack thereof to the MLM community.)

Using top/bottom/vers as a non-MLM is disregarding the history of those words and the reason why they exist. This is because these terms mean very specific things in our communities. A massive oversimplification of the meanings for the sake of time is that a top wants to fuck people, a bottom wants to get fucked, and a vers is fine with either position.

This should not be conflated with dom/sub/switch, which are terms in kink communities. When most non-MLM use top/bottom/vers, they are usually conflating it with dom/sub/switch. Which completely ignores the history of the word, and in some cases fetishizes MLM because the implication is that gay sex is the same thing as kink.

Saying something like "my (cis, non-MLM) girlfriend tops me!" is just incorrect unless she is pegging you (but I will get into why you still shouldn't use that word later). This is similar to how you wouldn't call a non-sapphic "stone" - it's not an accurate descriptor because it doesn't apply, and it's misusing terms that are only for certain communities as if they belong to everyone.

This may seem like a common but harmless misconception to many non-MLM, but it's actually really bad. Here are some examples of harm brought to the MLM community by misusing our language:

Our language being used as a vehicle to fetishize us and further ostracize us: by conflating vanilla gay sex with kink communities, people further the existing negative stereotypes about MLM and reveal their own unconscious anti-MLM biases. While plenty of MLM including myself are happy being included in kink communities, it is nonetheless harmful to our community as a whole to conflate the two like this.

Being left out of the conversation when it comes to our own experiences: convincing straight people that top/bottom/vers is for them, we are left out of discussions of our own experiences because non-MLM are convinced that they belong in our communities.

This isn't really harm, but non-MLM using top/bottom/vers is usually incredibly cringy for us MLM to witness and we will all collectively laugh at you.

I am already hearing some non-MLM say, "but what about the evolution of language? These words have been used by non-MLM for decades now!" and that is a fair point. However, it is important to recognize and understand when a term commonly used stems from appropriation, and fix that.

There is, of course, some nuance when it comes to non-MLM talking about MLM people using top/bottom/vers language. It is weird to say that someone is a top/bottom/vers when they haven't made that information public if you're non-MLM, or to be weird about that aspect of them. However, I would give non-MLM the benefit of the doubt in a lot of these cases.

Also, a few words on gatekeeping: saying that non-MLM shouldn't use top/bottom/vers might be considered gatekeeping by non-MLM, but in fact, protecting our language from appropriation isn't gatekeeping.

Also also, I'm using MLM here as an umbrella term for gay men, bisexual men, nonbinary people who love men and other nonbinary people, and everyone else who might identify with "gay" in the MLM sense. This post is not to gatekeep who is able to identify as MLM.

So what can you do if you're not MLM? First, stop using those words to refer to yourself, and start thinking more critically about who you're calling a top, bottom, or vers. Remember to educate yourself about queer language and terminology and to listen to MLM, especially trans MLM and MLM of color.

You can also reblog this post. I'm not going to guilt you into reblogging, or say that not reblogging this is homophobic, but I would still strongly encourage it. If you're not MLM, please don't start shit, just listen. My asks are open if you want to become more educated on this topic!

#asks #gay #discourse #queer politics

[sweetescapeartist]

Gonna say this here since I think y'all on Tumblr are more intelligent and less quick to react than ppl on Twitter.

I see others supporting the LGBTQ+ this month every year. Why don't I support? The reason why is because that group is doing alright. Much better than my people are. Being gay is still more acceptable than being black. And even when it wasn't, a gay person could at least hide their sexuality. A black person is black all the time. So, why should I who is part of a group of ppl who is positioned at the bottom in the country try to help a group who has more support than I do? Y'all keep getting yours while we keep trying to get ours. Support from me isn't needed when way more people support the LGBTQ+ group than they support my people. But ppl think if you dont support them then you are against them. Can't I just help myself and my people like everyone else does? So have fun celebrating Pride Month & I hope y'all have a good one. Imma celebrate Juneteenth.

Now... Do I dislike the LGBTQ+ group? No. Also I refer to that group as Queer since that is an umbrella term & I don't see the point of writing the acronym "LGBTQIA2S+" and all those other letter. I only know what half of those letters stand for without looking it up. Queer is easier to say and is an umbrella term. I dont understand why that term isn't used instead. Many use that term in a positive way now. The acronym is just too unnecessarily long. But back to what I was saying... I dont dislike any of them/y'all. My people are more than likely the most disliked people in the world. So why would I have hatred for other people and make them feel how we do nearly every day of our lives? I wouldn't. That just ain't my style. I've depicted bi characters in my art & I plan to depict lesbian, gay, & trans in my art too. I just don't like to talk as if I'm some supporter and ally. I dont like virtue signaling. When I eventually draw a comic about Kale & Caulifla, it just is what it is. When I eventually draw a comic about a trans character & a character who has shown some hints of possibly being gay, it is what it is.

And no, I won't say who the possibly gay character or trans character is. That is a surprise! But the series has hinted that the character I believe is gay is probably "in the closet." That's gonna be a fun comic to draw, but it won't be sexually explicit. Just sexually suggestive because as a straight man, I'm not interested in male on male stuff. But I can write stories about any sexuality so long as I understand it and the characters well.

[kakashihasibs]

Out of curiosity, why do you feel like you’re aromantic? I only ask because I’ve been very seriously thinking that I’m aro, but I keep second guessing myself. I think it would help to hear why another person is aro, but I just don’t encounter a lot of people or bloggers who talk about it.

Feel free to ignore if you want, people irl and on this site are still really weird about aros, so I totally understand not wanting to get into it

Ooougha okay so i have thoughts™ and you are about to get them all good luck lol i get to how i feel in terms of being aro towards the end. I promise this is all building up to that even tho it'snot gonna seem like it at 1st x_x.

(tl;dr: it took me 5 years to feel like i loved my husband and I'm not even sure the love i feel is romantic or not bc it feels the same as how i feel for my friends but overall I'm not even sure what benefit there is for me, personally, to ID as aro bc what's even the purpose of labeling our sexualities, political or personal? (it's a mix of both)

There's, from what I've seen, really two purposes to labeling one's sexuality.

1) political coalition building. -> Hi i am a Gay man and you are a Lesbian we are not The Same but we have political interests that are The Same and we are more powerful and safer together let's have each other's backs. And when there's an issue that affects only you I'll still show up for you and when it's an issue that affects only me you'll still show up for me.

And

2) community and communication. -> hi i am a gay man and you are a man also interested in men (gay/bi) lets be in a community and/or relationship

(Please dont come at me these are both huge over simplifications! I'm build up my thought process to a more complex idea!)

Neither of these things are mutually exclusive, of course, and these are only sorta loose ideas I've seen some people express here and there.

I only note them bc people who focus on number 1, political coalition building, are more often (not always!) a little more down on "micro labels," whether they are exclusionist or not, bc it, they argue, in some way muddies the waters in terms of coalition building. If there's so many niche labels now and we're creating more and more niche labels then we're creating more and more divides and not focusing on keeping each other safe under the same umbrella.

I've also seen the argument that making more and more niche micro labels is related to individualism and commoditization under capitalism. Like "look you too can have ur own special flag and identity! Now buy all this merch to show it off! Give us money!!!"

Which, for both of these concerns, i am sympathetic to to an extent. (Except out right exclusionists, fuck them.)

People who focus more on number 2, community and communication, are generally, in my experience, much more in favor of micro labels. Say ur like me, I'm asexual but I'm also gay but maybe aromantic, but then where does the gay fit in? Oh geez idk. But wait! There's a sexuality that breaks being gay while also aroace down! I have a word(s) for myself! Which inarguably feels good. It makes me feel understood and normal. And now i can find other people who experience sexuality just like me. I can find a small community to feel at home in. Right?

---

i have laid out these two general ideas. The possible purposes i might have for naming/labeling/understand my sexuality.

I approach my sexuality from a political standpoint AND from a personal standpoint which I think most people do bc again they're are not mutually exclusive.

I am in some way not straight (and not cis but not talking about that right now). I have faced violence and discrimination for my sexuality. I want to name my sexuality in order to identify myself with a political movement. I name my sexuality so when I take political actions or make political demands, it is understood by others that i am doing so in solidarity with other people who have face similar oppression. I want to name my sexuality so i can better articulate the problems I face. So other can go to bat for me (and I will go to bat for them even if the issue isnt mine!)

For example, back in the day when ace ~discourse~ was much much worse, I was threatened with corrective rape (irl for the record) but instead of anyone standing in any sort of solidarity with me, i was told i was misappropriating corrective rape. (Which still just fucking blows my mind but besides the point.) This is why exclusionist can fuck off btw. Instead of anything productive they just were yaknow evil. Ugh anyway

I also faced discrimination at the doctors when asked my sexuality. I was honest and said asexual which lead down a whole rabbit hole of bullshit. The coalition building purpose would look like, "i have faced discrimination at the doctors for my sexuality and so have you so lets team up and support a bill that protects patient autonomy and rights"

And on the personal side i can talk to other asexuals who have faced the exact same problems i have. I can find empathy and understand in a way i might not from an allo cis gay guy (that's not dunking on any allo cis gay guy! For the record. We just have different experiences and very similar ones too!).

So you can see the benefit of either approach right? Maybe i just wanna call myself just queer or just gay or just ace and be done with. I have my coalition and maybe my community it still very broad but it is there.

Or maybe i wanna figure out why it took 5 years to feel like i loved my husband. Or why maybe my love for my husband doesn't really feel any different than my love for friends? Should the love i feel for my husband even BE different from the love i feel for my friends? Am i actually even feeling love? We've been together for 12 years what different does it make now anyway?

I feel like I'm probably aro but i also feel like I'm not and I'm "only" asexual.

Things that affect aros affect nearly all of us. We're all impacted by amatonormativity. We all struggle with getting next of kin rights with our chosen family, just to name a couple things. Discussing and supporting aromantism will benefit us all.

But what about discussing someone who is ace aro and gay? Maybe? Idk? Does being aroacegay bring anything new to the table? Or is it just another flag to profit off of for some fucking corporation? I dont know!

For me, is there even any separation between being ace and aro and gay or is it just the same part of me being looked at through too many lenses?

And all of this is what i think and feel when i think or feel like I'm aro x_x which is to say bud i have no fucking clue lol.

All i really know is i will fight for anyone under the queer/lgbtq+ umbrella regardless if it impacts me and i hope and pray that when people like me need the same kind of support everyone else will also fight for us too.

I think I'm done now. Sorry u got this whole ass mess lol. x_x if you have any questions comments or concerns you can DM or anon me any of them :3 I'll happily address them

#rape mention #ask #anon #ben replies #idk how else to tag this x_x

[atthebell-moved]

okay so clay | dream (video blogging RPF) as purely a character tag has 65311 works and there are 103 works tagged with "bisexual clay | dream (video blogging RPF) which makes that 0.16% (0.03% higher than wilbur's 0.13%*, dream's is rounded up from 0.158) BUT i figure a bunch of these are rpf rather than c!dream so:

within the dream smp fandom tag filtering with "clay | dream (video blogging rpf)" there are 23560 works and 28 of works within the dream smp fandom tag are tagged with "bisexual clay | dream (video blogging rpf)" which is 0.12% (rounded up from 0.119%) (second only to wilbur's)

click keep reading if you want to hear about nerd ao3 shit i went a little nuts

if you're savvy with how ao3 tags work you'll notice that this still is a little off-- with the first one i'm solely looking at all works tagged "clay | dream (video blogging rpf) and then separately opening a tab with the tag "bisexual clay | dream (video blogging rpf)

with the second i'm opening the fandom tab for "dream smp" and then filtering by dream's character tag (so these works are just tags in the dsmp fandom tag that are also tagged with dream; therefore less likely to be rpf and more likely to be about c!dream) and using that number (23650) and then duplicating the tab and filtering by the additional tag "bisexual clay | dream (video blogging rpf)

if you're paying extra close attention and know how ao3 works, you might ask about this second one AGAIN bc another way of doing this would be to go into the dream smp fandom tag and filter by the character tag "clay | dream (video blogging rpf)" AND the additional tag "bisexual clay | dream (video blogging rpf)"; however, i looked at both and the number is the same. this last point is only bc sometimes people will use an additional tag that involves a character but wont tag the character themself (either through avoiding main tags or by mistake) and sometimes wranglers dont catch this and it doesnt get wrangled under the parent tag (the character tag, in this instance, "clay | dream (video blogging rpf)".

also also: to be a nerd (and because i had suspicions) i checked gnf's tags to see where he stands in terms of bi stats and here's the results (doing the same splitting as dream to attempt to avoid rpf): there are 40516 works in the "georgenotfound (video blogging rpf)" tag and 50 works in the "bisexual georgenotfound (video blogging rpf)" tag [also interesting to note that my checking the additional tag itself was a good idea; for gnf, there are three fics tagged as such outside of his character tag and 2 of said fics are actually not about gnf and must've been wrangled incorrectly. so the real number is 48 works!]

so for all gnf fics, this makes his stat 0.12% (rounded up from 0.118) when you just look at all works in the "bisexual georgenotfound (video blogging rpf)" tag.

when you filter the "dream smp" fandom tag (which contains 12024 works with the character tag "georgenotfound (video blogging rpf)") by "bisexual georgenotfound (video blogging rpf)" you get 9 works, which comes out to 0.08% (rounded up from 0.075).

this actually impressed me tbh-- usually in pairings where there is an "obvious" bottom (dont get me started on this, i have ten google docs on the problems with top/bottom dynamics in fandom but we're not talking about that at this moment; suffice to say i do not think georgenotfound is a bottom or femme or whatever other shit people say) people will tend to hc** that character as gay and the top or more "masc" half of the pairing as bi bc stereotypes; however, while gnf clearly has less bi works, he has a very decent number in comparison to other characters in this fandom(s).

i think what is also affecting these numbers is that irl, cc!dream is openly queer and attracted to both men and women; at this time he doesnt identify as bi but i think its safe to refer to him as multisexual or under the bi umbrella, as i like to think of it. all this to say, it makes sense that more people would hc dream as bi.

~

so in conclusion: when you're not attempting to exclude rpf, dream is for sure the #1 bi character tag with 0.15%, with wilbur in second with 0.12%. however, when you factor in how many fics that include dream are rpf versus how many fics with wilbur are cwilbur (though obviously things get tagged in different ways, people arent perfect, and character/cc bleed is a huge thing), wilbur is the #1 bi character tag on ao3. this concludes my ted talk thank you for listening i did so much math for this pls someone read this

~

*also i hadn't been rounding up previously so as an addendum to prior posts (not that anyone cares but me), wilbur's is 0.13% (rounded up from 0.129%) and eret's is actually 0.10% (rounded up from 0.097)

**i know that rpf is a VERY fuzzy place in regards to headcanons etc.; in this instance, im talking about the fact that people are writing stories in which gnf (an openly straight man) is with dream, already entering a world of fiction. so while its weird to talk about people "headcanoning" real people, thats functionally whats going on when people are tagging "bisexual georgenotfound (video blogging rpf)" or "bisexual clay | dream (video blogging rpf)" or whatever other additional tags are being used for dnf rpf.

#ao3 rabbit holes #also im bad at math so if i did the percentages wrong WHOOPS

[zeroar]

So I watched this video...

And the essayist suggests a major part of it is due to the fairly positive representation of a queer couple in Sailor Moon in the form of Sailors Uranus and Neptune. (That's only part of it, very good video, I just want to write out my thoughts in a word-vomit style while drinking some coffee so here we are)...

I think it's a little more than that though. Now, I'm fond of being overly reductive sometimes and saying something like "Sailor Moon made me gay" (and I'm using "gay" in its umbrella queer sense here).

But, whether someone can be turned gay aside (which, for the record, I come down somewhere around they basically can't unless they're bisexual), it wasn't the positive representation of Uranus and Neptune that did it. It was Season 1 of Sailor Moon.

It wasn't just a positive queer relationship in whatever season Uranus and Neptune came in (they were portrayed as cousins so until I went to the Internet to learn the truth there was nothing there for me even ignoring it was a later season), and it wasn't even the bisexual wonder girl that is Usagi/Serena who freely adored and went lovestruck over competent and beautiful women. With Mamoru/Darien kidnapped/brainwashed for half the first season anyway (and also inexplicably much older than he was in the manga), the relationship between her and Rei was so much more interesting and one where the characters could actually speak to each other, but it wasn't even thinking that Serena should be with Raye...

Aside: if you don't think Usagi is bi then I don't know what to tell you. Yes, Mamoru is her true love or whatever, but the girl's main characteristic is how freely and deeply she loves. She was interested in Sailor V way before she was interested in Tuxedo Kamen / Tuxedo Mask. (I'm half-joking because there's no explicit canonization of Usagi being bi—AFAIK—but I really cannot imagine her being any other way. I just see her as a bi girl in a heterosexual relationship).

Even beyond all that, the series Sailor Moon was possibly the first series I saw which treated women/girls as people and portrayed women favorably, let alone portrayed queer relationships and queer characters favorably (which was not done in the original American edit of the first season).

The women of Sailor Moon could be boy-crazy and ditzy, but they could also be heroic and self-sacrificing, studious, strong, smart, cool, collected... and yes, they were all beautiful. Even Zoisite—who I only later found out was a man—was gorgeous.

Sailor Moon loves women, and there's not much gayer than loving women.

Specifically, in the society of toxic masculinity / hegemonic masculinity / "the patriarchy", valuing women as people goes directly against how women get portrayed. It's not that valuing women is inherently anti-cishet, it's that the concept of being cis and heterosexual itself has gotten wrapped up in the toxicity so anything that rejects that norm is gay.

I'm not saying anything new here, though academic sources tend to default to "queer" instead of "gay", so I'll switch to that umbrella term now.

Valuing women as people is queer in the same way that the Addams Family is queer. Morticia and Gomez's relationship is a queer relationship in that it is a rejection of the patriarchy and a rejection of the cishet norms of hating your spouse and treating them as a burden you're saddled with.

There's a common sentiment in analyzing cishet men's relationships with women of saying something along the lines of, "do straight guys even like women? You guys can be gay. You don't have to pursue women romantically if you don't like them" and beyond what individual cis and heterosexual men may think about women, it is 100% true that the patriarchy and hegemonic masculinity don't like women.

At least part of the fear of "AI" is that hegemonic masculinity would lead to a conclusion of rejecting women in favor of love-bots. This only makes sense if the people doing the rejecting don't actually like women and just see them as objects, but that's what hegemonic masculinity teaches.

So yes, whether you're a cis man or something else entirely, loving women is queer. And Sailor Moon loves women.

It probably doesn't stand up to modern sensibilities, but my pre-teen mind only ever saw how incredible it was to be a bishoujo senshi when I was watching. The "camera" definitely highlighted how beautiful the women were (especially in their transformation scenes) but it only ever felt glorifying and exultant, and it did not feel exploitative or creepy.

With the exception of comic characters (Melvin/Umino, Chad/Yuichiro, Rei's grandfather, etc.), ALL of the characters were slender and long-limbed. That came off as simply the style of the show and not something about sexualizing the characters. Loads of issues with the lack of body diversity, but it was always so firmly celebrating these characters (who were all women/girls).

And, loving women is queer.

I honestly don't know how I would have turned out without having Sailor Moon in my life. Especially, so many incredible fanfiction stories that were even better than the series (though loads of exploitative and misogynistic ones too, which was always such a shock to stumble across).

Growing up in the 1990s, I was in social settings where the default was to be openly derisive and misogynistic towards women. (It's probably still broadly that way, I just am able to curate who I'm around now in a way you can't growing up). But having the example of positive women character representations (and also seeing how pretty people can be, both inside and out) was such a solace to child-Me. I'm grateful for having that representation even if it wasn't the queer representation I needed, it was the positive women representation I was desperate for back then.

Anyway, as much as I love the idea of Rei/Usagi, my favorite stories kept Usagi with Mamoru and had Rei with Minako. I get that Minako gets characterized as a Usagi clone/replacement (which is ironic), so it may seem that I'm just filling in, but in-text, Usagi and Mamoru are basically always together / in love with each other romantically and I never really questioned that so seeing so many incredible Reinako stories made that couple pretty solid in my head. I'm honestly not opposed to Usagi being in a poly relationship, but those fanfiction stories tended to be more lemons than character exploration.

TL;DR: Why are magical girls so gay? Because they portray women positively and that's extremely, extremely gay (in the sense that it is aligned against hegemonic masculinity and the patriarchy).

#sailor moon #queer #queerbaiting #hegemonic masculinity #magical girl #usagi tsukino #usagi is bi #fuck the patriarchy #Youtube

[berzerker-nerd]

This is kind of a touchy subject but I'd like to get my thoughts on it out there and I'm going to try to do it like I think Beau of the 5th column on YouTube would.

So today we're going to talk about the LGBT+ Community, the lgb alliance, my perspective as an outsider looking in, and why I say the queer community

First of all I am an outsider looking in. I am a cis/straight person (as I have said in other posts) but I want to be an ally to those that fall under the umbrella term queer. Now I know that some hate the term queer because it has been (and still is in some homophobic/transphobic groups) used as a slur. I understand not liking the term on those grounds. The main use of the term nowadays though including within the LGBT+ community is as a blanket term for anyone in that community including; enbys, people who are asexual or aromantic and so on and thats how I use it. To me it brings a sense of togetherness which to me is what a community should be: people coming together and sticking up for one another. Making it an acronym makes sections, and sections can be removed. Which brings us to the LGB alliance and the drop the T movement which is exactly what it sounds like. Some lesbians, gays, and bisexuals want to distance themselves from trans people, enbys, and other gender nonconforming people as well as aces and aros. In other words, removing sections. I've been hearing a lot of LGB people saying the same things about trans and nonbinary people that homophobic groups have been saying about them for years. Which in the current political climate especially here in the US which reads as "Hey we'll let you go after these people. We'll even help you do it, as long as you don't come after us." At least thats how it reads from my perspective. I can guarantee that the people who hate the LGBT+ community won't stop hating the community as a whole just because the LGB drops the T. Trust me ive met enough of those people to know. Ive also been hearing about bi phobia within the queer community at large which to me reads as the classic "one or the other pick a side!" thing that straight people have said to bisexual people for years as well as people saying that asexual and aromantic people aren't a thing which doesn't make sense to because if there are people who feel sexual or romantic attraction to the opposite sex/gender or to the same sex/gender then logically there have to be some that don't feel sexual or romantic attraction to any sex/gender.

I'll end with this: if you're part of a large community with smaller sections throwing one or more of the smaller sections under the bus isn't going to stop the bus from running the rest of you over. It might not even slow it down.

Its something to think about.

#queer rights #lgbt+ rights #that goes for cis/straight allies too #there aint no such thing as a half-way ally #its my understanding that pansexual is similar to bisexual but for those who don't see the world in the 2 gender binary #so to any pansexual folks that may be reading this #the thing about the 'drop the T' movement and biphobia in the community at large applies to ya'll too #the utter ridicule ya'll get ain't right

[sophocused]

situations at work that let me know that the internet is truly the only safe space for me, as a queer, mid-sized, SE Asian woman. also I'm from Canada, and a pretty liberal city at that, and yet the ignorance and covert discrimination is still much the same.

#1

can I say a little how spineless some of my co-workers can be when it comes to actively thinking about pride, and reducing the comp-het that kids learn from majority of media and family?

yesterday, one of the 11 yr old boys was trying to make a gay joke, where the punchline is to "trick" one of us daycare teachers into saying we're gay.

my other two coworkers, just saying, "no, I'm straight. what are you trying to say?" like it almost sounded like they were offended to be presumed to be gay.

I said, as half-jokingly as I could but with full determination to shut this mess down, I said, "I mean, would it be so bad?"

And finally one other co-worker said "Yeah, would it be so bad?".

And I said, "And during pride month too!"

Needless to say, I will never stop making kids slightly uncomfortable for making jokes that they were taught is supposed to be acceptable.

I got non-binary kids coming out to me, gay, lesbian, and kids as young as 9-11 years old telling me they're bi or pan or don't know.

It fills me with joy, that I could be there, an adult who is supposed to be the responsible one, the anchor, to be there to validate their emotions and experiences.

#2

During her break, my coworker A (cis woman) was talking shit about our coworker B (cis man) which at first was just the reasonable kind.

"He acts like he's the boss of us when we're at the same level," and other simple coworker complaints like that.

Then, coworker A got too comfortable with me. She started saying things like, "He acts more like a girl like me," or "I usually get along with gay people, but I don't know why he's so different."

Coworker B has never confirmed their sexuality or I believe is not comfortable disclosing it, but anyway that was all sorts of messed up.

I was taken aback and honestly feeling an internal, "The gay was too stunned to speak". (Using gay as an umbrella term)

#3

Coworker A goes to the gym at 5am every other morning. She is on a strict diet that involves her feeling guilty even for having a donut or a cookie provided by work.

I showed her one of my old pictures from 2020 when I was 20-30 lbs lighter and she exclaimed so loud that I should join the gym and workout with her and "get that body back."

Breh just let me be fat and pretty in peace.

#4

I was working while Coworker A and Coworker D (she works in a different room) were talking in a sort of open conversation again.

They started talking about Coworker B again and some presumed BL they saw in his YouTube search history, and gossiped that it's scandalous bc he works as a Catholic Sunday School teacher.

Coworker D also exclaimed with shock and disgust, "I can't believe this girl into a boy and boy into a girl stuff. Or that girls can know if they like girls already. They're so young to be thinking about that stuff!"

She said it with such bravado like she was used to the people in the room agreeing with her when she spoke like that.

Coworker A, who acted like she's an "Ally" and that "love is love" just said, "Yeah well, they're seeing a lot more because of tiktok these days."

Coworker D proceeded to talk Iike it's the exposure to LGBT+ content that is "turning" the kids gay or trans.

I was fuming, I did not speak, not my circus not my monkeys, esp bc Coworker D was quitting that day so she's thankfully no longer working with kids.

I hate it here.

I need to talk a gay person of colour, who's maybe also neurodivergent, and also mid to plus size.

#tw: homophobia #tw: dieting #nina rambles #during pride month????

[miamitu-illust]

he’s a little confused but he’s got the spirit

angsty bonus:

after a long and heartfelt hug he and Iroh had The Talk™ gay edition

#avatar the last airbender #atla #zuko #sokka #aang #katara #my art #sorry for the reupload it didn't show up in the tags ugh #implied homophobia #we see sokka using both his hands to do stuff like eating and drawing in the show #so he really is ambidextrous! #there was a post about it and it's where i got the idea for the first part from! #and aang's speech was pretty much taken from the tlok comics #it was aang's daughter who said it #and the fire nation has banned gay marriage when sozin was firelord #so i thought zuko listening to aang talking about air nomads stance on it #made him realize sharing prosperity isn't the only lie the fire nation has come up with #also i was using gay more of an umbrella term here! i'm all for bi zuko #but gay zuko is pretty great as well!

[twopoppies]

I’ve seen several “asks” on here trying to peg down Harry’s sexuality. Why do we need to fit him into one mold or the other. Why can’t he just be Harry? And if you HAVE to have a label on him why not just place him under Queer. That’s all encompassing isn’t it? At least that’s how my child has explained it to me. they say Harry is Queer because he doesn’t fit into any other mold, he’s just Harry

Let's see if I can articulate this properly.

I think the reason it's become such a topic of discourse is because of the way he's being heavily marketed as free and loose about sexuality and gender, without actually making it clear he's not straight. On top of that, there's a heavy push towards making him appear to possibly be bisexual to the GP with the push around that rumor when Medicine was first performed – and, while it was information that was never confirmed (again), it was seemingly approved by his team as the question of his sexuality was a syndicated topic. The marketing of Watermelon Sugar just added more fuel to the fire.

None of this really matters because most people I know don't care, and don't feel the need to know, how he actually identifies; they just accept that he's queer.

The problem seems to be stemming from a large group of people in the fandom who are aggressively pushing the concept that he could be bi/pan*, but their reasons for doing it are very suspect, IMO. What I've found most commonly is that those people fall in to four general categories:

People who will accept that he's queer as long as he also dates cis women, because then all the narratives make sense, and they also can enjoy their fantasies and hopes about sleeping with him.

People who hate Louis/Larries and realize that it's very clear Harry isn't straight, but they do not want to allow for the idea that he would ever sleep with Louis, or that Larries could ever have been right about their theories. So they would rather look like they accept the idea of multi-gender attraction when it comes to Harry, but in actuality will only defend his right to heterosexuality.

People who care less about what Harry's actual sexuality is, than they do about having the representation of bisexuality/pansexuality and being able to finger point and cry "bi-phobia" any time someone uses the word "gay" to describe him (even if it's meant as an umbrella term).

People who genuinely think he might be bi/pan. Please note: I have come across very few of these people who don't, upon further analysis, reveal themselves to actually be a part of group 1, 2, or 3.

So, yeah. I have no issue referring to him as queer. I generally mean it in an umbrella term way when I call him gay (because I know I don't know how he identifies). AND, I happen to think he's not bi/pan for various reasons, but it's really okay if he clarifies it one day and I'm wrong about that.

*I cannot possibly list every variation of sexuality in this post. For the sake of keeping things brief, I'm just using bi/pan. Please use your brain and realize I'm not purposely discounting anyone's sexuality by doing that.

in reference to this and this

#I don't really have time for discussing this today #not sure why i've answered this #harry's sexuality #fandom dynamics #ws discourse