Sometimes i remember a comics moment i randomly came across somewhere, where Sam Wilson mentiones a musical and Steve Rodgers says he doesn't like musicals, to whitch Sam goes "Guess that means you really are straight" and even tho i don't care about Cap America or the Avengers, the moment stuck in me for that quote by Sam. And like....Sci, any ideas if straight men actually don't like musicals or is that bullshit?
actually i think i know more gay men who hate musicals than i know straight men who hate musicals. i've had a drag queen stop me point blank when i was about to sing a barbra streisand song, and i know so many gays who pointedly hate abba. so based on my experience i think the inverse is true. most of the straight men i know are kind of impartial about musicals, but gay men? hate.
my theory is that a lot of gay men don't want to fall into stereotypes, maybe. but thaaaaat's just a theory! a gay theory.
36 notes
·
View notes
i think that while micro labels can seem useful and affirming ultimately they're isolating and kind of an obstacle to your understanding of self. that's because you can never find a word specific enough. there will never be a label or two labels or even ten, twenty of them to perfectly capture and describe all of your thoughts, feelings, experiences, preferences, needs, interests, identities, etc. because you learn more and more about yourself every day and then you change and your wants and needs change with you. having to hop between labels, fearing that you don't 'fit' into a label anymore (both in your own and others eyes), worrying how soon your current label will wear out, questioning if you'll ever fully fit a single one. all that causes a lot of uncertainty and anxiety which could be avoided by just picking a more general thing and molding it according to what it means to YOU. because words will always mean different things to different people, you will never be understood immediately and maybe never completely by anyone but yourself and that's fine
128 notes
·
View notes
like i guess re pronouns i think also like. many of us (trans/gnc/~gender-diverse~ people) are going to feel differently from one another and that diversity of thought is both inevitable and important
but there is a way in which, as with the question of whether you can group nonbinary people into 'people functionally includable in lesbian attraction' and 'people functionally includable in gay male attraction,' there's this process where like. there's an attempt to expand beyond the traditional framing and create more space for people, and then when that attempt runs up against cissexism and gets gummed up in some of the ways that article describes, you get people going, 'you know what, actually the really queer thing is to stop trying to expand mainstream culture into something that can accommodate queerness and just exist in a totally unspoken way,' and like. it's not that i don't get where that reaction is coming from, or that i totally disagree with it—as my one transfem ex said, the best days are the ones where you don't have to actively make a case for, or even really think about, your own gender!—but like. funny how that approach in certain ways ends up looking (and more to the point feeling) pretty indistinguishable from just. subsiding right back into the underbelly of the cistem…
14 notes
·
View notes
they were ordering cables today and they called one that's female on both sides "lesbian" and in my head I was like 'ok benefit of the doubt they don't HAVE to mean it in a homophobic way.. it's fine it's cool just as long as they don't call the male/male one-' "hey can you order two faggots too?" 😑😐
5 notes
·
View notes
stone femme would actually be the same as stone butch !! history wise- it used to be just an extension of dating a stone butch if you were femme. but stone femmes would share that trait of not being the receiver and being the giver in a relationship. while high femme is someone who expresses their femininity through their look/ style.
that is. not correct lmfao.
4 notes
·
View notes